SEYMOUR  DURST 


When  you  leave,  please  leave  this  hook 

Because  it  has  heen  said 
"Sver'thing  comes  t'  him  who  waits 

Except  a  loaned  hook." 


OLD   YORK   LIBRARY  —  OLD   YORK  FOUNDATION 


Avery  Architectural  and  Fine  Arts  Library 
Gift  of  Seymour  B.  Durst  Old  York  Library 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/problemofgreaterOObrea 


Photo,  by  Edwin  Levick,  A'.  Y. 

THE  SITE  OF  NEW  YORK'S  ORIGINAL  SETTLEMENT 


View  of  the  lower  end  of  Manhattan  Island,  showmg  the  extraordinary  grouping  of 
office  buildings  as  seen  from  the  Woolworth  Tower.    The  Upper  Bay  in  Uie  distance. 


THE  PROBLEM 

OF 

GREATER  NEW  YORK 

AND  ITS 

SOLUTION 


By 

HARRY    CHASE  BREARLEY 

WITH   A   SUPPLEMENTARY   CHAPTER  BY 

DR.  ELMER  L.  CORTHELL 

MAPS.    DIAGRAMS.    ILLUSTRATIONS,  AN 
APPENDIX  OF  VALUABLE  CIVIC  DATA.  AND 
AN  ANALYTICAL  INDEX 


PUBLISHED  UNDER  THE  AUSPICES 
OF  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON  INDUSTRL\L  ADVANCEMENT 

OF  THE 

BROOKLYN  LEAGUE 

BY 

THE  SEARCH-LIGHT  BOOK  CORPORATION 

450  FOURTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK  CITY 
1914 


THE  REM  ESTATE-BOARD  OF  m  YORK.  IHC. 


Committee  on  Industrial  Advancement 

of  the  Brooklyn  League 

WILLIAM  LIEBERMANN,  Chairman 

FRANK  BAILEY 

JACOB  C.  KLINCK 

Title  Guarantee  and  Trust  Company 

Williams  burgh  Trust  Company 

EUGENE  F.  BARNES 

A.  L.  LANGDON 

East  Brooklyn  Savings  Bank 

Traffic  Manager,  i.nd  Gen'l  Fgt.  Agt..  L.  I. 

R.  R.  Co. 

JOSEPH  BARONDESS 

WOODRUFF  LEEMING 

SAMUEL  BLOCK 

NATHANIEL  H.  LEVI 

CHARLES  A.  BOODY 

The  "Berlin" 

Peoples  Xrust  Cornpiiny 

LEWIS  H.  LOSEK 

FREDERICK  BRUCKBAUER 

Ltiwvor  >  i  illt'  Iiisurniicc  cUid  l^rust  (?o. 

ICQoctlie  Bros.  &  f  o. 

JOHN  McMULLEN 

MATTHEW  J.  CARROLL 

Atlantic,  Gulf  &  Pacific  Co. 

Briidst  r6ct 

HORACE  I.  MOVER 

THOMAS  E.  CLARK 

Moyer  Engineering  and  Construction  Co. 

Brooklyn  City  Stifc  Deposit  C/Oiiipuiiy 

CHRISTOPHER  C.  MOLLENHAUER 

FRANK  W.  CONN 

Brooklyn  Board  of  Real  Estate  Brokers 

New  York  Telephone  Company 

BENJAMIN  H.  NAMM 

M.  MAURICE  DIMOND 

A.I.  Namm  &  Company 

A.  D.  Matthews  Sons 

JOSEPH  A.  NACH 

ERNST  F.  DISTLER 

Bush  Terminal  Company 

Ferdinand  Munch  Brewery 

CHARLES  JONES  PEABODY 

GEORGE  DRESSLER 

Spencer  Trask  &  Company 

Dressier  Terminal  Company 

HERBERT  L.  PRATT 

JOHN  W.  F.  EHLERS 

Frederick  Loe-scr  &  Comi)any 

FREDERICK  H.  EVANS 

C.  S.  RINDFOOS 

The  Foundation  Company 

XJ.  S.  Titlt?  Insunuicc  Coiiipanv 

SIMON  F.  ROTHSCHILD 

Abraham  &  Straus 

LOUIS  L.  FIRUSKI 

Pioneer  Storage  Warehouses 

J.  F.  RYDENE 

D.,  L.  &  W.  R.  R.  Company 

HENRY  B.  SEAMAN 

CHARLES  H.  FULLER 

MAURICK  S  SKKLMAN.  JR. 

President  The  Brooklyn  League 

Edison  Electiic  Illuminnting  Company 

WILLIAM  M.  GREVE 

THEODORE  P.  SHONTS 

Realty  As -(.ciates 

Interboro  Rapid  Transit  Company 

J.  WM.  HAVILAND,  JR. 

ANDREW  T.  SULLIVAN 

Tebo  Yacht  Basin  Company 

Mecl'.anics  Bank 

GEORGE  JULIAN  HOUTAIN 

W.  WINTHROP  TAYLOR 

NATHAN  S.  JONAS 

WALTER  F.  WELLS 

Citizens'  Trust  Company 

Edison  Electric  Illuminating  Company 

FRANKLIN  B.  JOURDAN 

TIMOTHY  S.  WILLIAMS 

Brooklyn  Union  Gas  Company 

Brooklyn  Rapid  Traii.^t  Company 

JOHN 

F.  GEIS,  Secretary 

Copyright,  1914,  by  Harry  Chase  Brearley 


Preface 


THIS  book  is  the  result  of  an  investigation  into  a 
problem  that  vitally  concerns  every  person  wlio 
Hves,  works,  or  owns  property  in  the  City  of  Nevv' 
York.  The  following  i)ages  set  forth  conditions 
wliich  recjuire  an  unbiased  judgment  and  a  wise  decision,  for 
upon  the  wisdom  of  this  decision  depends,  in  some  measure, 
the  future  commercial  and  industrial  welfare  of  New  York. 

It  is  a  plain  exposition  of  facts  that  bear  directly  upon  the 
cost  of  doing  business,  the  scale  of  wages,  and  the  improvement 
of  living  conditions.  These  are  of  interest  alike  to  the  employer 
and  the  employe,  the  tax-payer  and  the  tenant,  the  seller  and 
the  consumer;  they  should  be,  in  short,  of  paramount  interest 
to  (^very  thoughtful  citizen. 

The  preliminary  investigation  has  extended  over  a  con- 
siderable period  and  has  included  an  examination  of  records 
and  docinnents  in  the  City  archives  as  well  as  consultations 
with  City  officials  and  other  authorities,  supplemented  by 
interview's  with  the  leading  civic  organizations  and  commis- 
sions. The  conclusions  presented  are  also  based  upon  studies 
of  the  State  and  Federal  records  and  an  investigation  into 
nninicipal  conditions  in  important  American  and  foreign  cities. 

^J^lns  oj)portunity  is  taken  to  acknowledge  the  courtesies 
extended  by  the  Chamber  of  Commerce,  the  Merchants'  Asso- 
ciation, the  Produce  Exchange,  the  New  York  City  Depart- 
ment of  Docks  and  Ferries,  the  Corporation  Counsel's  Office, 
the  Chief  Engineer  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportion- 
ment, the  Office  of  the  Borough  President  of  Brooklyn,  the 
Bureau  of  INIunicipal  Jlesearch,  the  Committee  on  the  Pre- 
vention of  Tuberculosis,  and  the  Tenement  House  Department 
of  the  Charity  Organization  Society,  the  Federation  of  Churches, 
the  United  States  x\rmy  Board  of  Engineers,  the  United  States 
Department  of  Commerce,  the  New  Jersey  Harbor  Commis- 
sion, the  New  York  Boat  Owners  Association  and  many  indi- 
vidual authorities. 

Conclusions  founded  upon  these  authorities  are  embodied 
in  this  volume,  which  is  an  endeavor  to  set  forth  concisely  and 
accurately"  Greater  New  York's  present  commercial  and  indus- 
trial situation,  and  to  arrive  at  a  just  solution  of  the  problem 
it  presents. 


Contents 

Page 

Preface  5 

The  Problem  7 


(Part  One-The  Problem) 

Chapter  I.    The    Challenge   to    New  York's  Commercial 

Supremacy  9 

Chapter  II.    Why  New  York  Gains  Industries  and  Why  It 

Loses  Them  19 

Chapter  III.    How  Congestion  Affects  Living  Conditions     .  25 


(Part  Two— The  Solution) 

Chapter  IV.    "  Part-way "  Measures  of  Relief      ....  31 

Chapter  V.    A  Great  Auxiliary  Harbor  Within  the  City  Limits  39 

Chapter  VL    The  Key  to  the  Industrial  Future  of  Greater 

New  York  47 

(Part  Three — The  Program) 

Chapter  VII.    How  to  Create  Municipal  Wealth  While  Solv- 
ing the  City's  Problem  53 

Chapter  VIII.    The  Balance  Sheet — A  Statement  of  Profits  57 

Chapter  IX.    The  Future  in  the  Hands  of  the  Present    .      .  67 

The   Greater  Port   of   Greater  New   York.     By  Dr. 

Elmer  L.  Corthell  69 

The  Appendix  79 

List  of  Illustrations   129 


Index 


130 


The  Problem 


New  York's  harbor  and  the  rivers  which  flow  into  it 
have  made  this  City  the  metropoUs  of  the  Western 
Hemisphere.  New  York  has  been  justly  accused  of 
neglecting  the  adequate  development  of  this  great 
chief  asset. — From  "Greater  New  York"  (official 
bulletin  of  Merchants' Association),  February  9,  1914. 

THE  PROBLEM  of  Greater  New  York  is 
the  harbor  problem — - 
The  citizens  of  New  York  have  many 
problems,  changing  in  form  and  degree  with 
each  new  generation,  but  the  City,  which  con- 
tains the  citizens  and  outlasts  the  generations, 
must  ever  deal  with  the  one  fundamental  factor 
of  its  existence;  New  York  is  a  sea-port. 

New  York's  original  site  was  fixed  by  its 
harbor;  its  growth  has  been  dependent  upon  its 
harbor.  Could  New  York  be  conceived  as  losing 
its  harbor,  it  would  straightway  dwindle  to  a 
second-  or  third-rate  city.  While  no  such  danger 
can  ever  menace  New  York,  it  is  no  less  true  that 
any  limitation  of  its  harbor  facilities  strikes  a 
serious  blow  at  the  welfare  of  the  City — which  is 
to  say,  at  the  welfare  of  the  citizens. 

We  purpose  to  show  that  such  a  limitation 
now  exists,  that  it  is  rapidly  becoming  menacing 
and  that  with  it  are  closely  associated  some  of 
our  most  serious  civic  problems. 


T  11  E      P  R  O  li  L  E  M      O  F      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  W      Y  O  R  K 


_V__^"iGkT  EG7TKD  LIOTS  5KCV  CITl^ 
UMITS  of  GREATER  NEW  YORK, 

 ROUMD  DOTTED  L1NL5  SHOW 

;irEVVDEK  HARBOR  LIMITS. 


/ 

'J.' 


ji? 


nevAk 


.  CBAJfWEIJL 


TAELS.  SHOVING  DIRECT  VATE-R 
FRONT  ofKXV  YORK  CITY  ini 
tKe  PERCENTAGE  PUBLICLY  OWKED 


BJSOJ^JC   

RICHMOND  


226.000    ^t.Z 

•»El,30O   73. a 

1,043,800    2:-.'l.  .5 

.1,039,300  190  & 

..   30;.500   57.  1 


3.053.300 


,  578.4 


He 


29^       24  7  14  4  577 

N'  <.-:  y\\VL%  PIJBUCLY  OWKX  J 


THE  PORT  AND  THE  HARBOR  OF  NEW  YORK* 
This  distinction  is  important  since  the  Port  inchides  a 
portion  of  the  New  Jersey  shore  (see  map)  and  is  used  in  figures 
of  foreign  trade.  Ambrose  Channel  Lightship  marks  the 
technical  limit  of  the  Harbor,  but  the  latter  word  is  used  in 
this  book  as  referring  to  the  shore-line  of  Greater  New  York. 

*  From  "'Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  bvR.  A.  C.  Smith.  Xew  York  City  Commissioner 
of  Docks. 


8 


T    11    E         ('   ()    M    M    K   K    (     I    A    L         C   H    A   L   L   K   X   (i  K 


(PA  R  r  0  X  E— T  HE  PROBLEM  > 

CHAPTER  I 

The  Challenge  to  New  York's  Com- 
mercial Supremacy 

Greater  New  York  is  in  the  position  of  a  giant  })onnd  ])y  iron 
bands.  (3ur  limited  port  and  terminal  facilities  will  not 
permit  the  full  use  of  our  limbs  any  longer.  Nothing  before 
the  business  men  of  New  York  should  have  closer  attention 
than  practical  measures  for  the  increase  of  our  port  and  ter- 
minal facilities. — Marcus  M.  Marks,  President  of  the  Bor- 
ough of  ^lanhattan,  at  Hotel  Astor,  March  '■25,  1014. 

WE  are  facing  a  new  commercial  era  to  which  former 
standards  will  not  apply.  The  wonderful  age  of 
railroad  development  is  about  to  be  superseded 
by  a  new  age  of  shipping  expansion.  This  is  the 
hand-writing  upon  the  wall  as  it  is  being  read  by  far-sighted 
communities  and  great  are  the  preparations  in  progress."^ 

At  the  point  where  goods  break  hulk  a  city  must  rise. 
^Vhen  young  America  w^as  dependent  upon  Europe  for  manu- 
factured articles,  these  goods  were  discharged  at  seaports  in 
order  to  reach  the  interior.  Thus  the  harbors  of  the  coast 
formed  settlements  where  shi])pers  and  traders  might  operate. 
Eacli  settlement  supplied  its  own  back-country,  and  the  richer 
the  back-country,  the  more  prosperous  became  the  settlement. 

New  Y^ork,  having  the  Hudson  River  at  its  back,  was 
able  to  serve  a  large  territory  and  thus  grew  in  importance, 
although  for  some  time  outranked  by  Boston  and  Philadel- 
phia, each  of  w^hich  enjoyed  special  advantages. 

Eventually,  when  the  sagacity  of  DeWitt  Clinton  opened 
for  New  York  the  commerce  of  the  vast  Lake  Region  through 
the  Erie  Canal,  New  York  already  first,  became  ])re-eniinent. 
Pre-eminent,  be  it  noted,  because  of  commerce. 

The  City  now  drew  to  itself  the  interior  trade  of  Canada 
and  of  the  rich  region  that  stretches  to  the  Mississippi.  "Y\an- 
kee  clipper''  ships  from  Xew  York  carried  the  American  flag  and 
foreign  goods  into  every  port  of  the  world.  Xew  York  waxed 
great  and  became  one  of  the  world's  large  cities. 

*  The  outbreak  of  the  European  war,  since  the  writing  of  these  words,  gives  them  an  added  emphasis. 
It  is  universally  recognized  that  a  superlative  opportunity  for  the  expansion  of  American  trade  and  shipping 
has  thus  been  created. 

**  New  York  City  did  not  pass  Boston  in  population  until  after  the  year  1760  and  did  not  pass 
Philadelphia  (including  suburbs)  until  the  year  18'-20. — United  States  Census  Statistics. 


THE     PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Then  came  the  railroad  era.  Trunk-Hnes  were  forced  to 
seek  tide- water  at  points  where  they  would  meet  the  ocean 
carriers;  New  York  became  a  railroad  center.  Its  prosperity 
grew  apace,  and  this  prosperity  was  founded  upon  the  harbor. 
Then  New  York  acquired  the  complacency  that  so  often  ac- 
companies prosperity.  It  began  to  feel  that  its  greatness  was 
by  Divine  right  and  unshakeable.  No  greater  mistake  can  be 
made  by  either  men  or  cities. 

Virtually,  this  is  the  situation  to-day,  save  that  recently 
certain  disquieting  signs  have  appeared. 

Imagine,  then,  the  original  Manhattan  germ  of  the  City 
in  the  process  of  providing  for  the  shipping  which  gave  it  life. 
For  the  small,  infrequent  sailing  craft  of  early  days  a  few  small 
wharves  were  sufficient;  more  and  larger  wharves  were  easily 
built  as  fast  as  increasing  demands  were  made.  When  the 
community  grew  northward  through  Greenwich  and  Chelsea, 
these  sections  of  the  waterfront,  as  well,  became  sites  for  piers. 


43.2Mi.  57.IMi.     7a6Mi.  l96.8Mi.  201.5  Mi 

Total  length  of  waterfront      578.4  Miles. 

MANHATTAN  HAS  THE  SMALLEST  WATERFRONT 


This  seven  and  one-half  per  cent  is  forced  to  provide  for  sixty-seven  per  cent,  of 
the  City's  total  shipping  (see  page  14). 

At  last,  a  limit  was  reached — anybody  could  have  foreseen 
it.  One  rather  small  island  does  not  present  an  unlimited 
amount  of  available  waterfront.  If  steady  growth  continues, 
there  must  come  a  time  when  this  waterfront  is  filled,  then 
crowded,  then  congested.  Nothing  could  be  simpler,  nor  more 
inevitable,  but  it  seems  to  have  come  to  New  York  City  as  a 
rude  surprise. 

One  would  suppose  that  the  descendents  of  the  far-sighted 
men  who  planned  the  Erie  Canal  would  have  foreseen  the  time 
when  New  York's  growing  commerce  would  require  auxiliary 
harbor  facilities,  and  that,  years  in  advance,  such  facilities 
comprehensively  planned,  would  await  the  call  to  service. 
This  is  the  way  important  European  ports  deal  with  their 


10 


THE 


COMMERCIAL  CHALLENGE 


shipping*,  and  other  American  cities  have  shown  themselves 
able  to  rise  to  heights  of  real  efficiency  when  occasion  required. 

Nothing,  however,  seems  to  have  been  farther  from  the 
thoughts  of  the  City  fathers,  and  this  state  of  mind  was  due  to 
one  of  the  strangest  of  reasons — the  Manhattan  Tradition. 

In  other  words  the  Island  of  Manhattan  was  at  one  time 
the  whole  City  of  New  York,  therefore  it  must  for  all  time  be 
the  whole  City  of  New  York;  complacency  abhors  change. 
True  it  had  joined  to  itself  other  boroughs  and  now  contained 
but  seven  per  cent  of  the  City's  total  area**,  but  this  fact  was 
negligible;  the  real  worth  and  greatness  of  New  York  City, 
its  primal  essence,  must  ever  be  bounded  by  the  Hudson,  East 
and  Harlem  Rivers  and  Spuyten  Duyvil  Creek — "as  it  was 
in  the  beginning." 

Foreign  Commerce  of  United  States. 
— ■— —  I 

Port  of  New  York 44.73%    Rest  of  United  States  55.^7% 
Money  Expended  by  Federal  Government  on  Channels 

Port  OF  New  YoRK-^  21. 2,01.  633    —   Restof  United  States  •^731 ,843,740 
Although  the  Port  of  New  York  transacts  44.73% 
of  this  Country's  Foreign  Commerce  ,  it  receives  only 
2 .68  %  of  the  Federal  Government's  Channel  Expenditure. 

Foreign  commerce  figures  are  for  year  ending  June  30,  1914. 

It  followed,  then,  that  "New  York  Harbor"  was  practi- 
cally s^^nonymous  with  "Manhattan  waterfront,"  and  that  the 
way  to  relieve  shipping  congestion  was  to  pull  down  Manhattan 
piers  and  build  longer  Manhattan  piers  upon  the  same  sites.*** 
This  was  expensive,  but  it  was  consistent.  It  was  also  strictly 
logical — when  once  you  admit  the  premises. 

Unfortunately,  this  sort  of  progress  encountered  an  obstacle 
in  the  Federal  Government.  The  Department  of  ^yar  is  re- 
sponsible for  the  main  channel,  w^hich  may  not  be  too  much 
encroached  upon.    After  years  of  hard-wrung  concessions,  the 

*  See  Appendix  (  Xotes  36,  37  and  38 — pa£?es  11-2-115). 

**  The  Engineer's  Office  of  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  gives  the  areas  of  the  boroughs 
in  acres,  as  follows-  Manhattan.  14,038;  Brooklyn,  45,327;  Bronx,  ae.o^S;  Queens,  75,111;  Richmond, 
36,600;  Total  for  Greater  New  York,  197,599. 

***  There  have  been,  of  course,  some  waterfront  improvements  in  other  boroughs,  as  will  later  appear , 
but  these  have  in  no  wise  affected  the  principle  under  discussion. 


11 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Photo,  by  Edwin  Levick,  .V.  1'. 

THE  ISLAND  S  CROWDED  WATER  FRONT 

"Manifcstl.N  the  congestion  of  traffic  must  at  the  present  time  be  acute  and 
extremely  ominous." — Barge  Canal  Terminal  Commission  (see  page  108). 


City  found  that  it  coiikl  push  out  its  pierheads  no  farther,  and 
in  a  condition  of  real  extremity  it  began  that  recent  project  of 
desperation  and  prodigious  expense — the  extending  of  piers 
and  sHps  inhmd  into  Manhattan  waterfront — the  most  vahiable 
land  in  the  world. 

This  project,  as  well  as  other  temporary  relief  measures 
at  various  points,  will  be  more  fully  considered  in  a  later  chapter, 
but  for  the  present  the  attention  of  every  citizen  should  be 
directed  to  two  great  compelling  facts — one  of  them  negative, 
and  the  other  positive. 

First — Greater  Xew  York's  present  welfare  is  dangerously 
threatened  by  its  harbor  limitation. 

Second — Three  new  events,  now  in  pre])aration,  will  afford 
to  the  City  commercial  op])ortunity,  rich  beyond  all  precedent 
— if  the  City  be  prepared  to  grasp  it. 

Let  us  examine  the  first  i)oint — the  present  limitation: 
Here  are  two  pregnant  statements  which  bear  upon  it.  The 
first  is  from  the  ^Merchants'  Association,  an  organization  of  3,500 
of  Xew^  York  City's  most  active  business  men: 


12 


T   II    K         ("   ()    M    M    K    R   (     I    A  L 


(HALL   K    X   (;  E 


Photo,  by  Paul  Thompson 


C()X(iESTI()X  OF  TRI  CKS  AT  THE  PIERS 

"The  lower  streets  of  the  ("ity  arc  now  nearly  impassable,  due  to  tiie  enormous 
number  of  these  trucks  constantly  iiaulin^'  parts  of  cargoes." — Hrifj.-dieu.  (i.  L. 
(jillespie  (see  page  87). 

The  commerce  of  the  Port  lias  far  out^irown  its  facihties.  The 
City  is  constantly  compelled  to  deny  application  for  dock  facili- 
ties, thus  driving  commerce  to  other  j)orts. — "(ireater  New 
York"  (the  official  bulletin  of  the  Merchants"  Association), 
February  0.  1914. 

That  is  the  warning  of  a  friend:  now  note  the  observation 
of  a  trade  rival: 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  the  shipping  facilities  of  New  York  Harbor 
have  not  kept  pace  with  the  country's  growing  commerce — much 
of  the  trade  formerly  going  to  that  Port  as  a  matter  of  habit  and 
a  matter  of  course  will  be  seeking  other  outlets  wherever  offered. 
— George  W.  Xorris,  Director  of  the  Philadelj)hia  Department 
of  Wharves,  Docks  and  Ferries:  Annual  Report  for  year  end- 
ing December,  \\)V2. 

Philadelphia,  by-the-way,  is  planning  to  take  advantage  of 
the  situation  by  providing  abundantly  for  commerce  that  may 
be  driven  away  from  New  York.  The  situation  has  been  tersely 
summed  up  by  Campbell  W.  Adams,  former  State  Engineer  of 
New  York.   In  warning  the  City  of  its  dangers,  he  says: 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


It  may  not  be  New  England  that  we  need  fear  again  but  the 
commercial  conqueror  of  New  York  may  be  in  the  South — or  in 
the  West.  So  we  see,  commerce  has  no  hard  and  fast  abiding 
place.  It  is  as  mobile  as  the  water  that  floats  it.  This  is  a  fact 
never  to  be  lost  sight  of. — 1897  Report. 

These  opinions,  which  might  be  indefinitely  supplemented, 
are  based  upon  the  following  facts:  Greater  New  York  with 
578  miles  of  waterfront  has  developed  but  103  miles.*  Its  224 
miles  of  wharfage  is  insuflicient  to  conduct  its  daily  business, 
a  condition  which  is  continually  aggravated  by  the  ill-advised 
policy  of  concentrating  commerce  upon  the  limited  shores  of 
Manhattan,  which  contain  but  seven  and  one  half  per  cent  of 
the  waterfront  of  the  City  of  New  York.  This  small  fraction 
was  forced  to  provide,  in  1913,  for  58,000,000  tons,  or  sixty- 
seven  per  cent  of  the  total  shipping,  as  against  28,000,000  tons, 
thirty-three  per  cent,  for  all  the  other  boroughs  combined  with 
their  ninety-two  and  one-half  per  cent  of  the  waterfront.** 

In  no  other  harbor  in  the  world  is  there  so  much  lightering 
done  as  in  New  York.  Countless  craft  of  every  sort  ply  the 
waters  of  the  North  and  East  Rivers.  Each  of  the  great  rail- 
roads maintains  its  ow^n  floating  equipment,  and  there  are  many 
independent  companies  engaged  in  the  traflfic.  The  approxi- 
mate number  of  New  Y^ork's  regular  "harbor  craft,"  as  distin- 
guished from  those  making  voyages  from  New  York,  is  3,000.*** 

The  foreign  and  domestic  steamship  services  each  use  but 
thirteen  per  cent  of  the  available  river  frontage,  whereas  the 
railroads  have  twenty-one  per  cent  and  the  balance  is  devoted 
to  various  public  and  private  uses.  All  are  urgently  pressing 
for  greater  accommodations.  Daily  there  are  from  1,500  to 
2,000  railroad  cars  on  floats****  congesting  the  waterfront  be- 
tween the  Battery  and  Perry  Street,  a  distance  of  two  miles. 

So  great  is  the  pier  hunger  that  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad 
in  1910  made  a  ten-year  contract  with  the  City  to  rent  the 
surface  and  but  one  side  of  pier  No.  34,  together  w^ith  seventy- 
five  feet  of  bulkhead  at  the  end  of  the  slip,  at  an  annual  charge 
of  $65,000.    This  is  a  characteristic  case. 

Now  note  a  most  astonishing  comparison.  Sixteen  years 
ago  (in  1898)  the  Governor  of  the  State  appointed  a  commission 
to  "look  into"  New  York's  harbor  problem  and  to  seek  some 

*See  Appendix  (Note  17 — page  96). 

**  New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce,  55th  Annual  Report. 

***  Estimated  by  New  York  Boat  Owners'  Association. 

****New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission,  4th  Preliminary  Report  (Page  171). 


14 


THE  COMMERCIAL  CHALLENGE 


means  for  relieving  the  congestion  of  freight  traffic.  And  this 
is  the  valuable  result: 

While  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York 
from  1898  to  1913  increased  131^,  the  wharfage  accommoda- 
tion of  the  City  was  increased  by  but  22%.* 

Is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that,  in  the  words  of  The  Merchants' 
Association,  "the  City  is  constantly  compelled  to  deny  appli- 
cations for  dock  facilities  thus  driving  commerce  to  other 
ports?"  And  is  it  at  all  astonishing  that  some  of  New  York's 
citizens  and  some  of  its  tax-payers  regard  with  dismay  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  hit-or-miss,  emergency-relief  policy,  bound  by 
the  costly  bands  of  an  outworn  Manhattan  Tradition  while 
hundreds  of  miles  of  City  waterfront  remain  unoccupied? 

There  also  is  that  other  phase:  If  the  City  cannot  provide 
for  its  present  needs  how  shall  it  grasp  a  remarkable  oppor- 
tunity for  increase  of  commerce? 

Foreign  Commerce  of  New  York. 

1898    IHHHH^H^aH  $8^1,136.844- 

1913  m^ma^mmmmmm^^^^mm^^^m  s  /,  366,256,6i  7 

Increase,    in    15       a.  rs  ,  1 3 1  °/o 

Wharfage  of  New  York 
1898  immm\\m^^^^^  97n  .^F;nFFFT 

1313  tm\m\\\mmm^^^^  i,iQ2,720  Feet 

Increase,  in  IS  Yeaks  Only  £Z% 

HOW  NEW  YORK  PROVIDES  FOR  ITS  COMMERCE 
Even  in  1898  the  harbor  was  considered  congested  (see  page  14). 

By  strange  coincidence,  three  epoch-making  events  are 
progressing  together.  These  are  the  Panama  Canal,  the  Intra- 
Coastal  Waterway,  and  the  New  York  State  Barge  Canal. 
The  total  cost  of  these  three  will  exceed  8600,000,000. 

]\Iany  who  are  interested  in  the  spectacular  features  of 
the  Panama  Canal  fail  to  realize  its  enormous  commercial 
importance.  It  will  invert  many  previous  conditions,  open 
new  markets,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  to  Xew  York  shippers, 
and  cause  a  general  re-adjustment  of  the  world's  trade  routes. 

New  York  City  will  be  the  chief  beneficiary  of  these  new 
conditions — or  it  will  be  the  principal  sufferer. 

At  a  hearing  before  the  Foreign  Trade  Committee  of  the 
Merchants'  Association  (^lay  14,  1914)  this  w^arning  was  given 

See  Appendix  (Note  35 — page  110). 


15 


THE      PROBLEM     OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


"COUNTLESS  CRAFT  OF  EVERY  SORT' 


by  Ex-Congressman  William  Harris  Douglas,  one  of  our  fore- 
most export  merchants:* 

Conditions  are  changing  rapidl}^  While  circumstances  have 
favored  us  thus  far,  we  can  no  longer  depend  on  good  luck  to 
keep  us  to  the  front,  and  our  people  must  at  once  take  action  to 
protect  their  interests.  The  cities  of  Boston,  Philadelphia,  Savan- 
nah, Newport  News,  New  Orleans,  Montreal  and  others  to  the 
north  are  making  great  strides  to  our  detriment  and  several  of 
them  are  spending  large  amounts  of  money  to  place  themselves 
in  a  position  to  rival  us  in  advantages  and  shipping  facilities. 
The  opening  of  the  Panama  Canal  is  to  a  large  extent  responsible 
for  this  activity.  It  will  unquestionably  bring  to  this  country 
an  expansion  of  shipping  interests  and  a  vast  extension  and 
increase  in  our  foreign  trade.  There  is  no  reason  why  we  should 
not  arouse  ourselves  to  a  realization  of  the  situation  so  that  we 
may  place  our  Port  in  a  position  that  will  enable  us  still  to 
command  a  large  share  of  America's  foreign  commerce. 
Here  is  a  statement  from  another  student  of  the  subject, 
Mr.  Willard  C.  Brinton,  in  the  ''Review  of  Reviews."** 

The  construction  of  the  Panama  Canal  has  caused  a  world-wide 
interest  in  harbor  development  and  harbor  management.  New 
York,  the  world's  leading  seaj^ort,  should,  because  of  its  com- 
manding geographical  position,  receive  a  greater  benefit  than 
any  other  world  port.   Though  the  Harbor  of  New  York  is  almost 
perfect  in  those  facilities  provided  by  nature,  the  hit-or-miss 
management  of  the  harbor  is  stunting  the  growth  of  commerce 
for  the  City  and  for  the  nation.    The  superior  management  of 
European  harbors  will  give  the  European  seaports  the  greater 
benefit  unless  immediate  action  is  taken  in  New  York. 
The  Merchants'  Association  of  New  Y^ork  publishes  the 
estimate  that  a  total  of  nearly  one  billion  dollars  is  being  now 
expended  in  port  develo])ment  throughout  the  world,  largely 
in  anticipation  of  the  Panama  Canal.    (''Greater  New  Y^ork,'' 
March  2,  1914.) 

*  See  Appendix  (Note  40 — page  IIG).    **  May,  1914. 


16 


T   HE  COM    M    E   R   ('   I   A  L 


(•   H   A   L  L  E   X   (1  E 


Here  is  another  most  interesting  side  of  the  subject  as 
shown  in  the  following  interview  in  the  "New  York  Times:" 

G.  W.  Luce  of  San  Francisco,  assistant  to  the  President  of  the 
Southern  Pacific,  is  at  the  Belmont  and  leaves  to-day  for  the 
Pacific  Coast.  He  has  been  in  Washington  looking  after  the 
interests  of  his  company  in  the  lemon  rate  case.  As  the  director 
of  all  freight  traffic  over  the  Southern  Pacific  lines  in  California, 
Mr.  Luce  is  regarded  in  Western  business  circles  as  an  authority 
on  rates,  and  his  opinion  upon  the  effect  of  the  opening  of  the 
Panama  Canal  is  of  interest  just  at  this  moment,  for  his  company 
is  a  keen  competitor  of  the  canal  for  transcontinental  freight. 
"We  know,"  said  he  to  a  "Times"  reporter  last  night,  "that  the 
Canal  is  going  to  hit  us  pretty  hard,  in  a  way.  We  will  lose 
freight.  It  means  that  the  S^ew  York  manufacturers  will  be 
able  to  quote  practically  New  York  prices  to  San  Francisco 
consumers.  Jobbers  on  the  Coast  will  lose  business. 
"This  result  is  so  far-reaching  that  even  j)rominent  business 
men  of  the  Pacific  Coast  have  failed  to  realize  its  importance. 
This  thing  is  only  two  years  away.  Oriental  goods  will  come 
direct  to  New  York,  instead  of  transshi})j)ing  to  rail  at  San 
Francisco  and  Seattle.  This  will  greatly  increase  New  York's 
trade.  The  ships  will  all  go  back,  again,  too,  with  American  goods. 
"So  vast  is  the  trade  movement  already  started  now  in  the  shape 
of  tangible  negotiations  such  as  numufacturers'  agencies,  that 
Hong  Kong,  San  Francisco  and  New  York  will  form  a  chain  to 
interdependent  markets,  so  linked  together  that  they  will  form 
a  dominant  factor  in  world  trade. 


Photo,  by  Paul  Thompson 


DOCKING  THE  IMPERATOR  IX  THE  NORTH  RIVER 


17 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


"Under  an  apparently  quiet  surface  this  gigantic  movement 
has  made  such  headway  that  when  its  actual  operation  sets  in 
motion  the  business  world  will  be  astonished." 

Still  one  wonders  how  these  benefits  can  redound  to  a  city 
which  cannot  even  provide  for  its  present  commerce. 

The  Barge  Canal  and  the  Intra-Coastal  Waterway  also 
are  undertakings  so  vast  that,  were  they  not  overshadowed  by 
the  Isthmian  achievements,  they  would  fill  the  public  eye. 
The  former  will  cost  more  than  $150,000,000  and  will  make  it 
possible  for  1500-ton  barges  to  proceed  from  ports  on  the 
great  lakes  to  tide- water  at  Xew^  York.  Since  goods  can 
be  carried  by  water,  for  far  less  than  the  cost  of  carrying 
by  rail,  the  resulting  stimulation  of  exchange  betw^een  this  City 
and  the  interior  of  the  continent  can  hardly  be  imagined.  The 
old  days  of  the  Erie  Canal  boom  will  doubtless  seem  insignificant 
by  contrast.  The  harbor  demands  upon  New  York  undoubtedly 
will  be  tremendous. 

But  New  York  cannot  provide  for  its  present  harbor  needs. 

The  Intra-Coastal  Waterway  has  attracted,  strangely, 
little  attention.  It  is  almost  unknown  to  the  majority  of  New 
Yorkers,  and  yet  there  is  an  inspiring  magnitude  about  an 
undertaking  that  will  make  it  possible  to  proceed  continuously 
from  Boston  through  a  canal  into  Long  Island  Sound  and  to 
New  York,  and  from  New  York,  in  turn,  through  canals,  rivers, 
bays  and  sounds,  down  the  entire  Atlantic  Coast,  around 
Florida,  skirting  the  margin  of  the  Gulf,  to  reach  the  mouth  of 
the  Rio  Grande  at  the  Mexican  border;  and  in  all  this  time — 
mark  this — scarcely  to  have  left  the  protection  of  completely 
land-locked  waters.  Here  again  is  a  situation  whose  commer- 
cial importance  to  New  York  can  hardly  be  imagined.  It  will 
cost  a  total  of  more  than  $100,000,000  and  will  stimulate  a 
coastal  commerce  of  an  entirely  new  kind  that  will  require 
harbor  facilities  in  many  cities  to  correspond. 

But  New  York  cannot  even  make  provision  for  its  needs 
of  to-day;  it  "is  constantly  compelled  to  deny  applications  for 
dock  facilities,  thus  driving  commerce  to  other  ports." 

Obviously,  then.  New  York  has  a  commercial  problem  for 
which  complacency  cannot  suffice.  Still  the  solution  seems 
simple  enough.  Since  the  103  miles  of  developed  waterfront  is 
insufficient,  why  may  not  the  City  develop  more  of  its  578  miles ; 
why  may  it  not  develop  this  where  it  may  be  done  most  easily 
and  efficiently ;  and — w^hy  need  there  be  any  delay  ? 


18 


INDUSTRIAL      GAINS      AND  LOSSES 
(PART  ONE— THE  PROBLEM; 

CHAPTER  II 

Why  New  York  Gains  Industries  and 
Why  It  Loses  Them 

Most  persons — even  those  living  in  New  York — think  of  the 
City  as  the  leading  financial  and  commercial  metropolis  of 
the  country.  Comparatively  few  know  that  it  is  also  the  most 
important  manufacturing  center  in  the  United  States.  New 
York  has  held  its  industrial  supremacy  during  the  past  ten 
years  in  spite  of  the  aggressive  competition  of  its  rivals,  East 
and  West — in  spite  of  all  the  adverse  forces  both  natural  and 
artificial. — New  York  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

NEW  Y^ORK  is  a  great  trade  magnet.  It  draws  to 
itself  the  products  of  every  quarter  of  the  earth. 
The  source  of  this  attractive  power  we  have  seen 
to  lie  in  the  harbor.  Indirectly,  but  actually,  this 
harbor  has  made  New  York  the  chief  manufacturing  center  of 
the  nation  and  one  of  the  greatest  markets  of  the  world. 

From  this  fact  arises  the  industrial  phase  of  the  problem 
and  it  becomes  appropriate  to  inquire  why  New  Y^ork  gains 
industries  and  why  it  loses  them. 

One  person  out  of  every  seven  in  New  York  City  is  directly 
employed  in  manufacture;  probably  one  out  of  every  three  is 
supported  by  factory  wages.*  The  capital  invested  in  the 
City's  manufacturing  establishments  could  far  more  than  pay 
the  national  debt;**  eighteen  months'  product  could  purchase 
all  the  real  estate  of  Manhattan  Island  (unimproved)***  and 
the  number  of  industrial  establishments  exceeds  the  com- 
bined number  of  Chicago,  Philadelphia,  Boston  and  St.  Louis, 
the  next  four  cities  in  rank.**** 

This  manufacturing  supremacy  is  founded  upon  several 
cogent  reasons: 

First — Greater  New  York,  w^ith  more  than  5,000,000  peo- 
ple and  suburbs  of  2,000,000  more,  represents  the  largest  and 
most  concentrated  buying  power  in  America. 

*  The  United  States  Census  for  1910  gives  the  following  New  York  City  manufacturing  statistics: 
Population,  4,766,883;  number  of  establishments,  25,938;  total  number  of  their  employes,  680,510;  annual 
output,  $2,026,692,576;  capital  invested,  $1,364,352,683;  annual  wages  and  salaries,  $445,771,857. 

**  National  debt  (1911-12)  $1,028,344,000  according  to  figures  furnished  by  United  States  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce. 

***See  Appendix  (Note  14 — page  93). 

****The  United  States  Census  for  1910  gives  the  number  of  manufacturing  establishments  in  these 
cities  as  follows:  New  York  City,  25,938;  Chicago,  9,656;  Philadelphia,  8,379;  Boston,  3,155;  St.  Louis, 
S.667. 


19 


T  H  E      P  R  O  15  L  E  M      OF      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  W      Y  ()  R  K 


Second — New  York  Harbor  is  the  chief  gateway  for  the 
export  of  American-made  goods. 

Third — New  York's  size,  its  shipping,  and  its  far-reaching 
raih'oad  connections  have  made  it  a  great  distributing  center 
for  l)oth  imported  and  domestic  goods  throughout  the  country. 

These  advantages,  together  with  its  inexhaustible  labor 
supply,  its  banking  facilities,  and  its  business  prestige,  seem  to 
afford  such  solid  foundation  for  industrial  supremacy  that  a 
little  civic  self-satisfaction  would  appear,  this  time,  to  be  par- 
donable.  Unfortunately,  investigation  reveals  two  serious  flaws. 

In  the  first  place,  Xew  York's  steady  gain  is  partially  off- 
set by  an  equally  steady  drain.  Dr.  Edward  Ewing  Pratt, 
^Manager  of  the  Industrial  Bureau  of  the  Merchants'  Association, 
has  this  to  say: 

The  situation  is  complicated  by  the  fact  that  along  with  the 
growth  and  expansion  of  industries  in  Manhattan  and  the  in- 
flux of  enterprises  from  a  distance  industrial  companies  are 
making  every  effort  to  get  away  from  Xew  York.  Indeed  there 
is  a  continuous  movement  away  from  the  City.  Thus  there  are 
to-day  no  iron  foundries  in  Manhattan,  and  the  metal  and 
machine  industry  is  in  decay.  A  few  of  the  old  time-honored 
concerns  remain.  The  young,  strong,  virile  concerns  have  left 
Manhattan  or,  perceiving  the  difficulties,  have  located  elsewhere.* 

The  second  difficulty  lies  in  Xew  York's  inability  to  compete 
for  many  of  the  most  valuable  new  industries.  The  manu- 
facture of  automobiles,  for  example,  has  been  the  chief  factor 
in  increasing  Detroit's  population  from  300,000  to  600,000  within 
a  few  years,  and  has  brought  to  that  city  and  to  others  abundant 
prosperity  while  imperial  Xew  York  City  possesses  but  a 
minute  fraction  of  the  industry. 

It  is  interesting  to  cross  the  Hudson  and  find  suburban 
Xew  Jersey  studded  with  great  factories  of  a  type  hardly  to  be 
found  in  Greater  X^ew  York.  Clustering  thickly  along  the 
railroads  and  waterways  leading  to  this  City,  they  are  located 
to  command  the  City's  market  while  paying  taxes  and  bringing 
l)rosperity  to  the  people  of  another  state. 

These  factories  are  monuments  to  Xew  York's  lost  oppor- 
tunities. They  tell  of  concerns  forced  out  of  Xew  York  or  of 
those  that  would  have  come  here  had  conditions  permitted. 
They  represent  hundreds  of  millions  of  capital  and  scores  of 

*  From  "Industrial  Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population  in  New  York  City,"  by  Edward  Ewing 
Pratt,  Ph.  D. 


20 


INDUSTRIAL      GAINS      AND      L  f)   S  S   E  S 


Courtesy  B.  T.  Babbitt 


LEAVIN(;  NEW  YORK  IN  ORDER  TO  EXPAND 
Small  picture  shows  the  old  plant  of  H.  T.  Babbitt,  occupying  less  than  one  city 
block;  large  picture  shows  the  present  New  Jersey  plant,  covering  twenty  acres,  >nth 
an  adflitional  sixty-one  acres  for  expansion. 

thousands  of  hands.  They  aiv  a  direct  k)ss  to  the  revenues  of 
the  entire  City. 

Newark  is  j)roseeuting  a  great  harbor  and  iiuhistrial 
project  for  the  })urpose  of  providing  factory  sites  adjoining 
deep  water.  It  is  also  anticipated  that  the  recently  created 
New  Jersey  Har})or  Commission  will  devote  much  of  its  energy 
to  similar  projects  on  the  Jersey  meadows,  to  the  increasing 
industrial  loss  of  New  York.  If  New  York's  authorities  l)iit 
realized  how  attractive  to  the  ears  of  her  manufacturers  is 
New  Jersey's  siren  song:  "Chejxp  lands,  room  for  expansion, 
light  and  air,  water  and  railroads,  low  taxes" — these  authori- 
ties would  take  account  of  their  own  city's  industrial  resources, 
its  thousands  of  fallow  acres  close  to  neglected  waterfront — 
enormous,  potential,  undeveloped. 

Let  it  then  be  realized  that  New  York  is  not  an  "all  round" 
manufacturing  city — it  might  l)e,  but  it  is  not;  New  York  is 
highly  specialized.  Dr.  Albert  J.  Nock  in  the  "American  Mag- 
azine" has  this  to  say: 

New  York  keeps  her  industrial  supremacy  by  tlie  inuneuse  vol- 
ume of  her  light-manufacturing.  Millinery,  cigars,  clothes,  wraps, 
made  by  a  myriad  of  little  concerns  of  small  invested  capital. 
It  is  the  aggregate  value  of  this  product  that  makes  New  York 


21 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


the  leading  manufacturing  center  in  the  country.  The  heavy 
manufacturing  is  done  in  New  Jersey. 

He  then  touches  upon  the  exodus  from  New  York: 
New  York  used  to  have  heavy  industries,  too,  but  they  have  all 
moved  away.    In  1870  there  were  enough  heavy  factories  along 
the  river  frontage  of  Manhattan  to  employ  100,000  skilled  work- 
men.   Gradually  they  disappeared  and  went  over  to  New  Jersey. 
The  Singer  Sewing  Machine  Company  was  the  first  to  go — it 
moved  to  Elizabeth,  New  Jersey.    The  Colgate  Soap  Company, 
which  has  been  operating  in  New  York  since  1806,  and  the  Loril- 
lard  Tobacco  Company,  in  New  York  since  1760,  moved  to 
Jersey  City.   The  only  original  settler  left  on  the  shores  of  Man- 
hattan was  the  printing-press  factory  of  R.  Hoe  and  Company  at 
Grand  Street,  which  is  still  there. 
This  list  might  be  extended  to  include  approximately  fifty 
large  manufacturing  concerns  that  have  left  Manhattan  Island 
because  of  the  congested  and  costly  conditions. 

Some  highly  instructive  tables  and  quotations  will  be  found 
in  the  Appendix  (notes  42  to  49) .  They  will  repay  study,  and 
this  study  will  be  found  to  be  practical,  not  academic.  It  is 
easy  to  lose  the  individual  in  the  mass;  to  feel  that  what  is 
everybody's  business  is  nobody's  business.  This  is  short- 
sighted. Not  onl}^  is  it  bad  municipal  business;  it  is  bad  per- 
sonal business.  It  must  never  be  forgotten  that  the  welfare 
of  the  City  is  the  welfare  of  its  citizens.  Civic  prosperity 
means  lower  taxes,  more  efificient  administration,  broader  op- 
portunities and  more  comfortable  conditions  to  millions  of 
those  who  rarely  give  a  thought  to  the  huge  Municipal  Busi- 
ness Enterprise  in  which  they  are  stockholders.  It  is  time 
for  them  to  consider  their  dividends,  in  the  light  of  those  gen- 
eral questions  which  affect  the  prosperity  of  the  metropolis. 

It  may,  then,  be  admitted  that  industrial  conditions  do 
not  present  the  acute  crisis  that  is  found  in  the  harbor.  In- 
dustrially New  York  is  great,  it  is  growing  and  it  exhibits  a 
surface  prosperity.  But  somehow  its  glory  seems  rather  tar- 
nished when  one  considers  how  much  of  its  supremac}^  is 
founded  upon  sweat-shop  conditions,  and  how  great  a  propor- 
tion of  its  workers  must  live  in  congested  tenements. 

The  feeling  of  dissatisfaction  is  further  increased  when  one 
watches  expanding  concerns  compelled  to  build  their  new 
factories  across  the  river  to  enjoy  advantages  which  New  York 
might  easily  give — but  does  not;  and  when  one  sees  industries 
drawn  from  other  points  by  the  mighty  pull  of  New  York's 


22 


INDUSTRIAL      GAINS      AND  LOSSES 


Courtesy  Bush  Terminal  Courtesy  Charity  Organization  Society 


THE  GOOD  AND  THE  BAD 
Large  picture  shows  a  well-lighted,  well-ventilated,  fire-proof,  waterfront  factory 
work-room ;  small  picture  shows  a  typical  New  York  "sweatshop." 

magnet,  only  to  search  the  City  for  the  conditions  they  require 
and  finally  invest  their  capital  in  another  state. 

An  inquiry  has  been  made  into  the  causes  for  such  results. 
Manufacturers  who  have  left  the  City  give  these  reasons: 

1.  Need  of  room  for  expansion.  2.  Loss  of  time  between 
the  factories,  and  the  homes  of  the  workers.  3.  High  cost  of 
land.  4.  High  rents.  5.  Congested  streets  and  trucking 
delaj'^s.  6.  Expense  of  re-handling  as  compared  with  loading 
and  unloading  direct.  7.  Inadequacy  of  rail  and  water  facilities. 
8.    xVpparent  negligence  in  relieving  these  conditions. 

The  conclusion  is  clear — one  cannot  blame  the  manufac- 
turer; if  he  finds  that  he  cannot  produce  in  New  York  and 
deliver  to  customers  as  cheaply  as  can  his  competitors  in  other 
cities — ^he  also  must  go  to  another  city  or  else  go  out  of  busi- 
ness.   Necessity  knows  no  law. 

But  is  it  Necessity?  President  William  A.  Marble  of  the 
Merchants'  Association  lays  down  four  requisites  for  an  ideal 
manufacturing  community,  as  follows:* 

•  "Greater  New  York,"  February  9,  1914. 


23 


T  II  E      P  R  ()  H  L  E  M      0  F      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  ^V      Y  0  R  K 


(a)  Cheap  lands  for  industrial  sites  and  low  rental  charges. 

(b)  Close  proximity  and  easy  access  to  rail  or  water  carriage. 

(c)  Reasonable  proximity  to  labor  markets  and  homes, 

and  easy  access  thereto  for  cartage. 

(d)  Readily  and  always  obtainable  food  supplies  with 

economical  facilities  for  distribution. 

The  problem  now  begins  to  assume  definiteness.  Greater 
New  York  has  at  its  disposal  every  one  of  these  advantages 
but  has  neglected  to  make  them  available.  It  has  more  than 
seventy  thousand  acres*  of  unoccupied  land.  It  has  four  hun- 
dred and  seventy-five  miles  of  undeveloped  waterfront.  It  has 
more  room  for  growth  than  any  other  city  in  the  United  States. 
It  has  more  labor  of  greater  variety  than  any  other  city.  It 
can  offer  not  only  the  inducements  of  other  cities  but  also  the 
three  unequalled  advantages  already  stated. 

But  it  does  not  make  them  available.  It  is  like  the  indolent 
farmer  with  unplowed  fields,  envying  his  neighbor's  crops. 

The  situation  is  trenchantly  summed  up  by  Calvin  Tom- 
kins,  ex-Commissioner  of  Docks  for  New  York  City.  With  a 
full  appreciation  of  the  gravity  of  the  situation  he  made,  in 
1912,  the  following  statement: 

The  industrial  development  of  the  Port — that  is  factory  develop- 
ment— is  of  far  greater  importance  than  is  the  Port  commerce 
since  it  brings  po})ulation  and  fixed  capital  with  it  ...  .  (New 
York's)  business  is  yearly  increasing  by  leaps  and  bounds,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  industries  and  commerce  which  would 
otherwise  locate  here  are  being  directed  to  other  cities  as  the 
result  of  our  lack  of  provision  for  them  here.  An  immense  im- 
petus will  ])e  given  to  the  Port's  trade  on  the  opening  of  the  Erie 
and  Panama  Canals,  and  when  the  rush  comes  it  will  be  almost 
impossible,  in  the  face  of  the  congestion  which  will  ensue,  to 
carry  on  intelligently  the  needed  re-organizations  and  improve- 
ments— that  is,  unless  a  beginning  shall  be  made  now. 

New  York's  paramount  industrial  need,  therefore,  at  the 
present  moment  is  a  practical  plan  upon  which  to  organize  its 
natural  resources,  to  distribute  its  j^opulation,  and  trade,  and 
to  develop  its  neglected  land  into  new  industrial  centers — in 
short  to  take  fuller  advantage  of  unparalleled  opportunities. 

What  this  plan  may  be — and  how  it  may  be  efficiently 
organized  for  immediate  service  will  soon  receive  attention. 

*  Accordiiif^  to  the  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Taxes  and  Assessments  for  1913  (page  67),  35.8% 
of  the  total  number  of  land  parcels  in  the  city  are  vacant.  This  percentage  of  the  City's  197,599  acres  would 
be  70,840  acres,  which  figure  probably  is  far  below  the  truth,  since  parcels  of  unoccupied  land  will  average 
of  larger  size  than  parcels  of  occupied  land. 


24 


C  ()  N       E  S  T  I  ()  N     A  N  D    L  I  ^'  I  X  G    ('  O  X  I)  I  T  I  0  X  S 


(PART  O  N  E  —  r  H  E  PROBLEM) 

CHAPTER  III 

How  Congestion  Affects  Living  Conditions 

The  conditions  in  New  York  are  without  parallel  in  the  civi- 
lized world — In  no  other  city  is  the  mass  of  the  working  popu- 
lation housed  as  it  is  in  New  York — In  no  other  city  are  there 
the  same  appalling  conditions  with  regard  to  lack  of  light 
and  air  in  the  homes  of  the  poor.  In  no  other  city  is  there  so 
great  congestion  and  overcrowding — In  no  other  city  are  the 
conditions  of  life  so  complex;  nowhere  are  the  problems  so 
difficult  of  solution. — Report  of  New  York  City  Commission 
on  Congestion  of  Population  (1911). 

THE  foreign  traveler,  coming  up  New  York  Bay  for 
the  first  time,  receives  a  strange  impression.  He 
has  l)een  accustomed  to  cities  occupying  the  ground, 
but  here  he  finds  one  filling  the  air.  He  has  always 
thought  of  crow^ds  as  touching  elbows,  he  now  sees  them  piled 
in  layers.  If  he  is  polite  he  tells  the  reporters  that  it  is  ''won- 
derful," but  meanwhile  he  may  be  thinking,  ''absurd." 

What  the  astonished  traveler  sees  is  the  concrete  embodi- 
ment of  the  ^Manhattan  Tradition,  with  its  material  splendor, 
its  economic  waste,  and  its  sociological  horror.  Here  are  the 
most  magnificent  business  structures  that  the  world  has  ever 
seen,  and  here  also  are  more  than  100,000  interior  rooms 
with  little  light  or  ventilation.*  Here  is  almost  incredible 
concentration  of  wealth  and  here  also  are  single  blocks  in  which 
all  of  the  inhabitants  could  not  find  room  to  stand  in  the  street 
at  one  time. 

These  facts  (piickly  translate  themselves  into  dollars  and 
cents  to  the  citizens  of  New  Y^ork;  and  indirectly,  too,  but 
certainly,  they  are  the  outgrowth  of  those  harbor  conditions 
which  first  led  New  York  to  believe  that  it  must  concentrate 
all  of  its  civic  activities  upon  a  single  narrow  island.  It  is  this 
attemj)t  that  has  led,  ({uite  naturally  and  inevitably,  to  loss  of 
time,  to  elevated  railroad,  subway  and  bridge  crushes,  to  con- 
gested streets,  high  rents,  high  taxes,  cramj^ed  quarters,  increased 
cost  of  living  and  doing  business,  and  all  the  other  evils, 
physical,  mental  and  moral,  which  must  result  from  i)lacing 
artificial  limitation  upon  the  expansion  of  a  metropolis. 

*  23,788  rooms  without  wliulows  and  78,115  rooms  insufficiently  lighted.  See  Municipal  Year  Rook 
for  1913  (page  115). 


25 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


1,  Courtesy  Charity  Organization  Society;   2  and  3,  Photo  by  Edwin  Levick,  N.  Y, 


STUDIES  IN  NEW  YORK  CONGESTION 
1.  Scene  in  Hester  Street  (see  Tuberculosis  Map).    2.   A  West  Side  Market. 
3.  Crowded  street  traffic;  note  storing  of  goods  on  the  sidewalk. 

Here  is  a  statement  from  a  report  in  the  Mayor's  Office, 
signed  by  the  Committee  on  Transit,  Docks  and  Ferries  (1911): 
The  awful  congestion  of  population  in  the  Borough  of  Manhattan 
has  attracted  the  attention  of  lawmakers  and  reformers  for 
about  fifty  years — It  seems  to  be  about  time  for  a  united  and 
determined  effort  to  make  for  the  interests  of  the  City  at  large, 
and  of  its  people,  to  over-ride  the  great  special  interests,  to  the 
end  that  this  metropolis,  with  its  natural  advantages  and  ac- 


26 


CONGESTION    AND    LIVING  CONDITIONS 


^  I  !:n(      OF       hi:      r  Lo  s  I s 

K->o  1-  -  !  yn  -  : 


Conrirsij  Charity  Organization  Society 

ONE  OF  THE  RESULTS  OF  OVERCROWDING 
This  picture  shows  conditions  that  breed  tuberculosis;  a  family  of  seven  people  living 

in  one  room  and  a  closet. 

quired  wealth,  may  become  a  fit  place  for  men  of  limited  means 
to  live  and  bring  up  their  families. 

In  very  truth  New  York  is  not  now  such  "a  fit  place." 
But  why.^  It  embraces  about  200,000  acres.  Its  population  is 
5,300,000  people.  It  might  give  two  acres  to  every  fifty-three 
people.  Instead  it  is  crowding  one  thousand  people  on  one 
acre  in  its  most  congested  areas. 


27 


THE      P  R  O  B  L  E  IVr      OF      GREATER      N  E  W      Y  ()  R  K 


Note  -  Each  dot  represents  ten  people 


Population  iqoo  to  the 
acre  in  new  york  city's 
most  congested  district 
located  on  the  lower 

EAST  SIDE  OF  MANHATTAN 
BOROUGH 


Average  population 

LESS  THAN  30  TO  THE 
ACRE  IF  NEW  YORK  CITY'S 
PRESENT  POPULATION  WERE 
EVENLY  DISTRIBUTEDOVER 
THE  FIVE  BOROUGHS  . 


Why  should  it  be  necessary  for  one-sixth  of  all  the  City's 
population  to  live  below  14th  Street  upon  one  eighty-second* 
of  its  area?  Why  must  there  be  crowded  into  this  space  also 
the  factories  that  employ  one-half  of  all  New  York's  factory 
workers?  And  why,  in  addition  to  these  occupants  must  there 
be  piled  upon  this  same  small  area  a  considerable  proportion 
of  the  office  buildings  of  the  metropolis? 

Why?  Because  it  started  that  way.  Manhattan  has  an- 
nexed the  other  boroughs  })olitically ;  by  bridge  and  tunnel  it 
has  annexed  them  physically;  but  it  has  never  annexed  them 
industrially  and  comniercially.  The  City  has  preserved  the 
^Nlanhat  t  an  Trad  it  ion . 

Mr.  Lawrence  Veiller,  of  the  Tenement  House  Committee, 
a  well-known  authority,  wrote  in  1905:** 

No  conception  of  the  existing  conditions  can  be  obtained  from 
any  general  statements.  To  say  that  the  lower  East  Side  of 
New  York  is  the  most  densely  populated  spot  in  the  habitable 
globe  gives  no  adequate  idea  of  the  real  conditions.  To  say  that 
in  one  section  of  the  City,  the  density  is  1,000  to  the  acre  and 
that  the  greatest  density  of  population  in  the  most  densely  po])u- 
lated  part  of  Bombay  is  but  759  to  the  acre,  in  Prague  485  to  the 
acre,  in  Paris  434,  in  London  365,  in  Glasgow  350,  in  Calcutta 
204,  gives  one  no  adequate  realization  of  the  state  of  affairs.  No 
more  does  it  to  say  that  in  many  city  blocks  on  the  P^ast  Side 
there  is  often  a  population  of  2,000  to  3,000  persons,  a  population 
equal  to  that  of  a  good-sized  village.  The  only  way  that  one  can 
understand  the  real  conditions  is  to  go  down  into  the  streets  of 
these  districts  and  see  the  thousands  of  persons  thronging  them 
and  making  them  impassable.    So  congested  have  become  the 


*  There  are  approximately  2,400  acres  in  Manhatt 
**Quoted  in  the  Report  of  the  New  York  City  Cum 


tn  below  14th  Street. 

lission  on  Congestion  of  Population  (1911),  page  5. 


28 


C  ()  X  G  E  S  T  I  0  X     A  XI)     L  I  V  I  X  G    ('  ()  X  I)  I  T  I  0  X  S 


NEW  YORK  BOMBAY  PRAGUE  PARIS 

1000  TOTHEACRE  759  TO  THE  ACRE  485  TO  THE  ACRE  434T0THEACRE 


Note  —  Each  dot  represents  ten  people 
LONDON  GLASGOW  CALCUTTA 

36ST0THEACRE  350  TOTHEACRE  204T0  THE  ACRE 


Population  of  the  Most  Congested  Districts 
IN  Seven  Large  Cities 

conditions  of  some  of  the  (juarters  of  the  City  that  it  is  not  an 
exaggeration  to  say  that  there  are  more  people  living  there  than 
the  land  or  the  atmosphere  can  with  safety  snstain.    The  limits 
have  not  only  been  reached  but  have  long  been  passed. 
This  is  substantiated  by  a  report  from  the  New  York  City 

Coniniissiou  on  Congestion  (1911),  which  says: 

The  Island  of  Manhattan  is  the  site  for  the  greatest  concentra- 
tions of  factories  and  offices  in  the  world.  Many  })uildings, 
occupied  almost  entirely  by  factories,  are  from  1'2  to  18  stories  in 
height,  and  the  mere  fact  that  nearly  half  of  the  total  number  of 
workers  in  factories  in  this  City  are  occui)ied  in  factories  located 
in  the  '2,717  acres  below  14th  Street  and  up  to  ^Oth  Street  on  the 
west  side  of  ^lanhattan,  would  necessarily,  with  the  present  long 
hours  of  work,  even  with  better  wages  than  tliose  now  paid, 
produce  congestion  of  ])opulation,  or  the  massing  of  many  })e()ple 
u])on  very  limited  areas.  For,  with  the  present  hours  of  labor 
the  factory  workers  must  live  near  their  work. 
The  full  significance  of  this  statement  is  not  realized  until 

one  finds  tliis  ex])lanation  in  the  same  report: 

The  most  marked  effects  of  congestion  of  population  are  upon 
rent  and  wages.  The  mere  i)resence  of  a  large  population  in 
certain  sections  on  account  of  the  increased  demand  for  housing 
accommodations,  has  the  natural  result  of  increasing  the  rent 
which  is  demanded,  and  of  diminishing  the  wages  in  so  far  as  tlie 
amount  of  work  for  which  wages  are  j)aid  does  not  increase. 
The  high  rents  and  the  low  wages  have  the  effect  of  forcing  the 
poi)ulation  to  live  in  more  and  more  congested  conditions. 
Rents  are  so  high  and  wages  so  low  in  the  congested  districts 
of  the  City  that  it  is  these  districts  that  are  (piite  commonly 
taking  in  lodgers  or  boarders  in  order  to  enable  them  to  pay  the 
rents  which  are  demanded. 


29 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


All  this  is  wrong  because  it  is  unnecessary.  In  1898,  New 
York  made  itself  Greater  New  York  by  annexing  vast  outlying 
districts,  including  Brooklyn  and  Queens,  and  yet  it  has  con- 
tinued the  attempt  to  conduct  the  business  of  the  greater  city 
within  the  confines  of  the  outgrown  city. 

These  conditions  have  borne  heavily  upon  the  merchants 
and  the  manufacturers,  the  tax-payers  and  the  rent-payers. 
They  have  everywhere  produced  a  fictitious  high  level  of  costs 
by  virtue  of  which  all  must  pay  tribute  in  time,  money  and  com- 
fort to  unnatural  and  unnecessary  conditions. 

The  time  for  "relief  measures"  has  passed.  The  only  way 
to  cure  congestion,  and  at  the  same  time  to  provide  for  more 
people,  more  factories  and  more  business,  is  to  provide  more 
land  and  to  effect  a  proper  distribution.  New  York  City  has 
the  land.    How  shall  it  effect  the  distribution.^ 


We  have  noted  the  causes  and  some  of  the  results  of  New 
York's  great  problem.  We  have  seen  how  New  York  developed 
originally  upon  Manhattan  Island  and  leaped  into  prosperity 
as  the  gateway  of  the  nation;  how  the  growth  of  the  country, 
coupled  with  the  extraordinary  advantages  of  Manhattan 
waterfront,  caused  a  concentration  of  commerce,  industry  and 
population  upon  this  island  until  congestion  resulted;  and  how 
this  congestion  now  tends  to  drive  commerce  and  industry  to 
other  cities. 

We  have  seen  that  in  the  opinion  of  many  thoughtful  and 
impartial  authorities  a  crisis  now  exists;  and  that  this  problem, 
commercial,  industrial  and  sociological,  is  fundamentally  trace- 
able to  the  failure  to  relieve  an  outgrown  harbor. 

We  have  seen  how  these  conditions  directly  affect  the 
health,  morals  and  living  conditions  of  5,300,000  people;  how 
they  increase  the  operating  expenses  of  nearly  140,000  mer- 
chants;* how  they  place  excessive  burdens  upon  26,000 
manufacturers;  and  how  they  are  charged  up  on  the  bills  of 
400,000  taxpayers;**  and  in  all  this  we  have  seen  how  they 
affect  the  present  and  future  welfare  of  Greater  New  York. 

Such  is  the  Problem;  we  must  now  seek  the  solution. 

*  According  to  United  States  Census  figures  the  City  contained,  in  1910,  122,890  merchants;  an 
increase  proportionate  to  the  increase  in  population  would  make  the  present  number  nearlj'  140,000. 

**  This  is  an  unofficial  estimate  based  upon  the  fact  that  there  are  545,094  parcels  of  land  on  the 
1914  tax  bst. 


30 


P      A      R      T     -     W      A      Y  MEASURES 


(PART  TWO  —  THE  SOLUTION) 

CHAPTER  IV 

"Part- Way"  Measures  of  Relief 

The  leading  commercial  interests  of  the  community  are  seek- 
ing a  solution  that  will  retain  to  the  City  its  supremacy  as 
the  leading  port  of  the  country. — Report  of  the  Public  Service 
Commission. 

SINCE  the  problem  primarily  concerns  the  harbor,  the 
first  step  tow^ard  a  solution  must  also  concern  the  har- 
bor. Hence  an  inventory  seems  in  order. 
Greater  New-  York,  as  already  stated,  possesses 
extraordinary  resources.  Its  308  square  miles  of  land  are  so 
divided  and  indented  by  nearly  175  square  miles  of  water  as  to 
give  it  a  total  w^aterfront  of  578  miles,  within  the  City  limits; 
578  miles  in  a  straight  line  from  New  York  would  reach  as  far 
as  Indiana. 

New  York's  tidal  variation  is  only  five  feet.*  The  natural 
channels  are  deep ;  the  anchorages  are  good;  the  currents,  ex- 
cept in  the  East  River,  are  moderate.  This  surely  is  princely 
harbor  wealth. 

Only  103**  miles  of  the  578  are  developed.  This  is  the  crux 
of  the  Problem — 475  miles  still  remain  undeveloped.  Does  not 
this  in  itself  suggest  the  solution.^ 

But  it  is  first  in  order  to  inquire  as  to  the  steps  already 
being  taken  toward  the  desired  end.  To  this  Problem  there  have 
been  devoted  during  the  last  few  years,  much  thought  and  many 
words.  How,  then,  have  these  words  fulfilled  themselves  in 
action.^  Where  is  there  a  comprehensive  harbor  plan  for  New 
York  like  that  of  London,  Liverpool,  Antwerp  or  Hamburg? 
The  metropolis  has  show^n  that  it  can  deal  in  a  large  way  with 
some  of  its  problems.  Its  $375,000,000***  rapid  transit  plan  is 
genuinely  magnificent,  its  $176,000,000****  Catskill  w^ater  sys- 
tem is  an  engineering  triumph;  its  bridges  are  monumental. 
All  of  these  represent  civic  might  conquering  great  difficulties. 
But  in  contemplating  New^  York's  harbor  policy  this  virile 
picture  vanishes,  and  there  is  seen  instead  the  ineffectual  figure 

*  Liverpool  has  an  extreme  tidal  range  of  31  feet.   See  Appendix  (Note  30).   Many  of  the  other  Euro- 
pean ports  must  also  contend  with  heavy  tidal  ranges. 
**See  Appendix  (Note  17). 

***  The  present  subway  system  is  estimated  at  $50,000,000  and  the  proposed  extensions  at  $325,000,000 
additional. 

****  The  original  estimate  of  $161,800,000  was  increased  by  $15,000,000  by  change  in  plan. 


31 


T  HE      P  R  0  B  L  E  M      ()  F      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  W      Y  ()  R  K 


Photo,  hij  Keller 


THE  SITE  OF  THE  NEW  PIER  DEVELOPMENT 
Showing  piers  that  are  being  removed  to  make  room  for  the  new  structures. 

of  one  so  pampered  by  fortune  as  to  have  been  rob})e(l  of  all 
resourcefulness — helpless  in  the  face  of  opportunity. 

AYhile  other  cities  have  been  compelled  to  create  great 
harbors  imder  adverse  conditions,  Xew  York  has  always  en- 
joyed the  advantage  of  natural  deep  water  at  its  Manhattan 
wharves,  and  cannot  yet  realize  that  this  has  been  ftdly  occtipied. 
It  has  not  learned  to  think  in  any  other  terms.  It  is  the  victim 
of  its  own  good  fortune.  Xew  York  has  generally  met  the  in- 
creasing pressure  of  commerce  with  spasmodic,  inco-ordinated, 
hit-or-miss  measures  of  temporary  relief,  forgetting  that  relief 
soon  calls  for  more  relief,  becoming  in  the  end  more  expensive 
than  the  ctire.    This  will  become  evident  from  a  brief  stirvey. 

The  City  of  Xew  York  has  expended  $115,000,000  upon  its 
wharves  and  piers  since  1870,  principally  upon  Manhattan 
Island  which  has  but  seven  and  one-half  per  cent  of  the  total 
waterfront.  In  general  the  plan  has  been  to  remove  old  piers 
and  to  replace  them  with  longer  ones  upon  the  same  sites. 
This  adds  some  feet  of  wharfage  btit  leaves  the  total  length 
of  improved  waterfront  exactly  as  it  was  before.  It  is  like 
the  farmer  who  increases  his  ctiltivation  by  plowing  one  field 
a  little  deeper  and  leaving  his  other  fields  in  weed;  then  he 
wonders  at  his  troubles. 


32 


P  A  R  T  -  A  Y  M  E  A  S  1  R  E  S 
 J 


Drawing  by  Brigden 

THE  "COSTLY  SACRIFICE  "  ^VHEX  COMPLETED 
Ultimate  plans  call  for  eight  of  these  enormously  expensive  structures. 


A  conspicuous  example  of  this  "intensive"  method  is  now 
in  progress  on  the  North  River  front  near  44th  Street.  AYhen 
the  ^Yar  Department  finally  said,  "Thus  far  and  no  farther"  to 
the  policy  of  extending  piers  there  seemed  to  the  authorities 
no  recourse  but  that  of  gaining  longer  piers  by  pushing  inland — 
of  course,  on  Manhattan.  This  meant  the  purchase  of  immensely 
valuable  real  estate;  it  meant  the  excavation  of  solid  rock 
involving  the  construction  of  a  8500,000  cofferdam;  it  meant 
in  short,  an  expenditure  of  about  83,000,000  for  each  1,000-foot 
pier.  This  amount,  elsewhere  applied  in  this  City,  would,  as 
hereafter  will  be  shown,  go  far  toward  solving  permanently 
the  whole  harbor  problem  but,  unfortunately,  it  would  be — 
elsewhere. 

Three  million  dollars  seems  a  costly  sacrifice  to  lay  upon 
the  altar  of  the  Manhattan  Tradition,  but  when  did  true  wor- 
ship ever  count  the  cost.^ 

It  is  conceded  that  these  piers  will  not  pay.  The  City  must 
meet  interest  of  four  per  cent  upon  the  money  borrowed  to 
construct  them,  while  the  piers  may  yield,  net,  three  per  cent 
on  their  cost.  Greater  New  York  is  therefore  paying  a  subsidy 
to  keep  up  Manhattan's  congestion.  Upon  this  project  the  New 
Jersey  Harbor  Commission  in  its  4th  Preliminary  Report  remarks : 


THE      PROBLEM     OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


The  City  of  New  York  has  now  embarked  upon  a  project  for 
buildmg  long  piers  between  44th  and  59th  Streets.  These  will 
unquestionably  be  very  expensive  and  scarcely  give  promise  of 
being  self-sustaining. 

The  "Engineering  Record"  (July  18,  1914)  is  more 
specific.    It  says: 

The  central  metropolitan  location  of  these  piers,  so  quickly  and 
easily  accessible  from  the  great  passenger  terminals  and  hotels 
of  the  City,  will  undoubtedly  be  a  convenience  to  passengers  and 
an  advantage  of  the  steamship  lines  which  is  more  pronounced 
because  so  much  superior  to  that  of  most  other  great  seaports. 
It  is,  however,  to  be  seriously  questioned  whether  these  advan- 
tages, which  are  certainly  not  vital  ones,  are  commensurate  with 
the  great  cost  of  the  undertaking  which  will  materially  add  to 
the  City's  enormous  liabilities  and  interest  burden.  There  are 
other  objections^ — the  obstruction  of  the  public  highway  of  the 
river,  none  too  wide  at  the  best;  encroachment  upon  the  valu- 
able space  at  the  land  end;  and  finally  the  positive  increment 
which  will  be  added  to  the  congestion  of  city  traffic  rather  than 
the  relief  that  might  be  obtained  if  the  piers  were  located  on 
Long  Island  or  on  Staten  Island  where  they  could  be  constructed 
much  more  cheaply,  quickly  and  advantageously,  could  have 
unlimited  space,  and  w^ould  still  be  thoroughly  convenient  and 
much  nearer,  both  in  point  of  time  and  distance,  than  are  the 
steamship  piers  of  many  other  large  cities  to  their  civic  centers. 
A  broad  gauge  policy  for  New  York  that  would  classify  railroad, 
steamship,  industrial  and  warehouse  interests  and  establish  them 
with  ample  provision  for  perfection  and  future  extension  in 
districts  where  they  could  be  advantageously  constructed  and 
properly  connected  with  the  center  of  the  City,  would  be  far  more 
economical  and  result  in  much  greater  progress,  prosperity, 
convenience  and  beauty  for  the  City  than  the  unbalanced  crowd- 
ing of  new  constructions  adding  new  business  to  the  intensely 
congested  area  of  Manhattan  Island. 

Worst  of  all,  this  project  belongs,  generically,  to  the  family 
of  Part- way  Measures. 

There  are  several  minor  projects  in  contemplation  or  process 
along  the  North  River.  Where  some  extension  of  the  pierhead 
limit  is  still  permissible,  a  few  feet  will  be  gained  by  lengthening 
various  piers.  Several  railroads  are  being  persuaded  to  invest 
their  own  capital  in  rebuilding  their  piers  on  a  41-year  lease 
privilege;  these  piers  ultimately  w^ll  revert  to  the  City.  Both 
of  the  above  are  obviously  relief  measures. 

To  the  east  of  Manhattan  Island  they  are  having  a  historic 
struggle  with  that  rock-bound,  current-vexed  tidal  strait,  the 
East  River.    This  contest  has  cost  already  $5,426,230.94,  and 


34 


PART    -     WAY  MEASURES 


there  will  be  required  $3,374,479.16  more.  There  has  lately 
been  adopted  by  the  Federal  Government  a  new  project  calling 
for  $13,398,519  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  the  depth  of  the 
main  channel  to  thirty-five  feet.*  The  depths  along  the  East 
River  pierhead  lines  now  vary  from  thirty  feet  to  less  than 
thirteen  feet,  making  much  of  this  waterfront  unavailable  for 
larger  craft.  In  spite  of  the  great  expense  the  execution  of  this 
project  may  be  desirable  because  of  the  importance  of  the  East 
River  as  a  through  route  between  the  Sound  and  the  Lower 
Harbor.  The  removal  of  the  reefs  and  the  deepening  of  the 
channel  cannot,  however,  entirely  eliminate  the  powerful  tidal 
currents  which  have  always  proved  a  menace  to  navigation. 
It  has  been  officially  recorded  by  the  authorities  of  the  United 
States  Navy  Yard  in  Brooklyn  that  the  existence  of  these  cur- 
rents has  made  the  movement  of  battleships  to  and  from  the 
Navy  Yard  a  matter  of  difficulty  and  danger. 

The  Harbor  of  New  York  is  notoriously  deficient  in  dry 
dock  facilities.  There  is  under  consideration  a  combination 
dry  and  wet  dock  to  be  constructed  on  the  South  Brooklyn 
waterfront  which  is  to  be  sufficiently  long  to  accommodate  the 
largest  ships.  The  plans  call  for  a  dock  1,100  feet  long  which, 
when  not  in  use  for  dry  dock  purposes,  can  be  flooded  and  used 
as  an  ordinary  commercial  pier. 


SOUTH  BROOKLYN  MARGINAL  RAILROAD 
Planned  to  connect  the  existing  terminals  at  points  marked  1  and  2,  thereby  effect- 
ing, through  the  transfer  bridges  shown,  a  close  connection  between  the  New  Jersey 
railroad  terminals,  the  steamships,  and  the  industrial  and  storage  facilities  along  its  route. 


This  plan  shows  the  municipal  project  known  as  the  South 
Brooklyn  Improvement."  It  contemplates  a  marginal  elevated 
freight  railway  from  Fulton  Ferry  to  65th  Street.  It  w^ill  con- 
nect the  terminal  properties  of  the  New  York  Dock  Company 

*  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C,  Smith,  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


35 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  W      Y  O  R  K 

and  the  Bush  Terminal,  which  it  is  proposed,  shall  be  bought 
by  the  City,  and  will  provide  for  the  construction  of  terminal 
yards  and  accessories.  The  need  for  such  a  co-ordination  of 
these  important  terminal  units  has  been  long  apparent.  The 
plan  provides  for  an  elevated  through  line  from  which  branches 
are  to  be  taken  off  at  intervals;  these  branches  will  give  access 
through  a  system  of  ramps  to  the  necessary  industrial  sidings 
and  waterfront  connections. 

In  addition  to  facilitating  the  handling  of  freight  on  an 
extensive  scale,  the  Marginal  Railroad  will  open  the  district 
along  its  line  to  the  commercial  development  for  which  it  is 
well  adapted.  An  ultimate  extension  of  the  railroad  to  the 
north,  beyond  Brooklyn  Bridge,  is  also  contemplated.  As  at 
present  planned,  it  is  estimated  that  this  project  will  cost  the 
City  $13,500,000.  The  correctness  of  the  principle  underlying 
the  improvement  is  generally  conceded,  and  the  Greater  City 
as  well  as  Brooklyn  Borough  will  share  in  the  great  benefits 
of  its  operation. 

Several  private  enterprises  must  be  numbered  among  the 
"part-w^ay"  measures  for  the  solution  of  Xew  York's  harbor 
problem.  On  the  Brooklyn  side  of  the  Upper  Bay  is  an  im- 
provement known  as  the  Bush  Terminal,  planned,  built  and 
operated  by  private  capital.  It  consists  of  a  series  of  long  piers 
immediately  adjacent  to  extensive  concrete  buildings  for  manu- 
facturing and  warehousing  purposes,  all  of  them  joined  together 
by  a  terminal  railroad  which  has  float  connection  with  the 
trunk  lines  terminating  in  New  York.  The  success  of  this 
enterprise  has  been  due  to  the  practical  application  of  intelligent 


Courtesy  S'eic  York  Dork  Covipanij 


A  STEP  IN  THE  RIGHT  DIRECTION 

New  York  Dock  Company's  new  model  factories  on  Atlantic  Basin Vaterfront. 


30 


P     A      R      T     -     W      A      V  M      E      A      S      1       R      1-:  S 


Coiirtrsy  Bush  Tcnniitdl  W arcliuu.sc  C  otnpanij 

THE  FAMOUS  BUSH  TERMLXAL 
An  admirable  co-ordination  of  piers,  factories,  warehouses  and  railroad  connections. 


foresight  in  co-ordinating  the  niantifactnring,  warelioiising  and 
transportation  functions,  l)ut  its  growth  is  naturally  circum- 
scribed by  the  liigh  value  of  the  land  surrounding  it.  It  is  a 
pocket  edition  of  a  model  ])ort. 

A  somewhat  similar  development  is  that  of  the  Xew  York 
Dock  Comi)aiiy,  which  occupies  a  long  stretch  of  Brooklyn's 
East  River  waterfront  and  also  maintains  piers,  bulkheads, 
railroads  and  warehouses,  upon  land  of  high  value. 

The  same  general  considerations  apply  to  the  Jay  Street 
Terminal,  and  the  Brooklyn  Eastern  District  Terminal.  An- 
other private  company  is  constructing  a  terminal  at  large  expense 
on  the  Bronx  shore  of  the  East  River.  This  will  follow  the 
general  character  of  the  Bush  Terminal,  but  its  location  makes 
its  success  somewhat  more  problematical.  I^pon  the  north- 
eastern corner  of  St  at  en  Island,  the  American  Dock  Company 
has  also  developed  a  system  of  docks  and  buildings  of  fair  extent. 
These  organizations  of  private  capital  are  valuable  adjuncts 
to  the  City,  but  all  of  them  combined  cannot  be  considered  in 
any  way  as  the  solution  of  the  harbor  problem. 


37 


THE      PROBLEM     OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


These,  with  the  comprehensive  plans  being  prepared  by 
the  New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission,  include  practically  all  of 
the  promising  projects  for  harbor  relief,  with  one  conspicuous 
exception  to  be  reserved  for  discussion  in  a  separate  chapter. 
Each  has  value,  individually  great,  but  in  the  aggregate  they 
are  in  no  way  commensurate  with  the  problem  offered  by  the 
pressing  needs  of  the  nation's  principal  seaport,  nor  with  the 
remarkable  opportunities  lying  before  it. 

Having  reviewed  the  activities  of  New  York  Harbor  admin- 
istration, let  us  cross  the  ocean  and  gaze  at  the  refreshing  vigor 
of  European  methods.  Note,  for  example,  the  manner  in  which 
the  city  of  Antwerp  is  dealing  w^ith  its  harbor  problem.*  Hav- 
ing outgrown  its  present  facilities  this  aggressive  Belgian  city, 
whose  population  of  291,000**  is  but  six  per  cent  of  that  of 
Greater  New  York  (scarcely  equal  to  two  years'  grow^th),  has 
planned  and  is  beginning  to  construct  an  extension  to  its  harbor 
at  a  total  cost  of  $55,000,000.  It  is  a  plan  of  surprising  boldness, 
in  the  light  of  our  own  temporizing  methods.  It  involves 
creating  a  new  channel  for  the  river  Scheldt,  cutting  off  seven 
miles  of  the  present  river,  thus  removing  two  sharp  curves  and 
providing  a  tideless  anchorage  basin,  six  miles  long.  Parallel 
to  the  new  channel  a  comprehensive  system  of  basins  is  to  be 
constructed.  The  total  plan,  already  completely  worked  out, 
will  provide  for  the  needs  of  many  generations,  but  it  is  being 
built  in  sections  only  as  rapidly  as  required  by  commerce. 

What  is  the  result.^  The  first  section  (3^^  mile  of  wharfage) 
was  crowded  with  ships  and  barges  before  it  was  finished,  and 
arrangements  were  at  once  made  to  complete  the  next  section 
consisting  of  two  slips  and  a  turning  basin.*** 

This  is  really  scientific,  constructive,  harbor  planning. 
Someone  has  said  that  a  "blind  man  could  administer  such  a 
harbor,"  nothing  being  necessary  but  to  construct  each  new 
section,  as  required  by  commerce  and  upon  plans  already  laid 
down.  Thus  each  section  becomes  a  part  of  a  coherent  whole 
— the  ultimate  harbor  of  Antwerp.  Antwerp's  problem  is 
definitely  solved. 

Where,  then,  and  when,  shall  New  York  adopt  the  same 
comprehensive  methods  and  find  its  solution.? 

*  The  outbreak  of  war  has,  of  course,  put  a  temporary  check  upon  this  development. 

**  Population  in  1905. 

***See  Appendix  (Note  37— page  113). 


38 


THE        AUXILIARY  HARBOR 


(PART  TWO  —  THE  SOLUTION) 

CHAPTER  V 

A  Great  Auxiliary  Harbor  Within  the 
City  Limits 

Good  and  sufficient  harborage  is  not  purely  a  local  matter;  it  is 
of  moment  to  the  whole  country  ....  It  is  of  national  im- 
portance— indeed  of  international  importance. — William  G. 
Ford,  Jamaica  Bay  Commissioner.* 

THE  solution  of  New^  York  City's  harbor  problem  is 
a  matter  of  too  great  moment  for  "part-way" 
measures  and  temporary  relief.  It  must  be  ap- 
proached in  a  far-sighted,  broad-minded  spirit,  and 
solved  adequately  and  permanently,  in  the  spirit  of  European 
harbor  planning.    The  time  for  temporizing  is  past. 

Greater  New^  York  requires  a  modern,  auxiliary  harbor  com- 
mensurate with  the  needs  of  the  City  and  nation;  a  harbor  where- 
in grow^th  may  be  stimulated  and  not  hampered,  and  w^herein 
provision  may  be  made  in  advance  for  the  demands  of  the  future. 

Since  existing  projects  are  inadequate,  it  is  in  order  to 
consider  undeveloped  resources  heretofore  neglected.  A  glance 
at  the  map  of  Greater  New^  York  reveals  a  remarkable  feature. 
At  the  gateway  to  its  harbor,  at  the  very  entrance  from  the 
Atlantic  Ocean,  there  lies  a  considerable  body  of  water — en- 
closed wdthin  the  City's  limits.  Its  shape  suggests  a  land- 
locked harbor  wdth  a  narrow  inlet  leading  to  the  highway  of 
travel  in  Ambrose  Channel.  It  bears  the  name  of  Jamaica  Bay. 

This  is  the  largest  bay  wdiolly  w^ithin  Greater  New  York. 
Its  thirty-tw^o  square  miles  of  area**  could  contain  all  of 
Manhattan  Island  wath  7,000  acres  to  spare.  Its  islands  aggre- 
gate 4,200  acres,  far  exceeding  the  total  area  of  several  of 
the  Cit^^'s  largest  parks.  Most  of  these  islands,  like  the 
parks,  are  the  property  of  New^  York  City. 

The  size  of  Jamaica  Bay  can  hardly  be  conceived  without 
view^ing  its  expanse.  The  indentations  along  its  shoreline  are 
such  that  it  presents  a  waterfront  of  more  than  twenty -five 
miles***  w^hich,  wath  the  usual  piers,  could  be  developed  to  one 
hundred  and  fifty  miles.     From  Canarsie  to  the  center  of 

*  1909  Report  (Page  90). 

**  Total  area  of  bay,  including  islands.  See  1907  Report  of  Jamaica  Bay  Improvement  Commission 
(Page  13). 

***  This  does  not  include  the  hummocks  in  the  Bay. 


39 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Rockaway  is  approximately  five  miles — nearly  as  great  a  dis- 
tance as  that  between  the  Battery  and  St.  George,  on  Staten 
Island — and  yet  this  is  one  of  the  Bay's  narrow  dimensions. 
Its  length  from  inlet  to  head  is  equal  to  the  distance  from  the 
Battery  to  Grant's  Tomb. 

The  waterfront  of  Jamaica  Bay  is  about  fifty  per  cent 
longer  than  the  waterfront  of  the  whole  harbor  of  Baltimore.* 
It  is  nearly  twice  as  long  as  that  afforded  on  Manhattan  by 
the  Hudson  River  from  the  Battery  to  135th  Street  and  the 
East  River  from  the  Battery  to  Hell  Gate  combined. 

Thus  Jamaica  Bay  is  a  physical  fact  of  compelling  propor- 
tions; it  is  one  of  the  dominating  geographical  features  of 
Greater  New  York.  Its  size  and  location  make  it  impossible 
to  ignore;   its  proper  use  is  obviously  of  great  importance. 

Two  immediate  questions,  therefore,  arise:  (1)  Can  Ja- 
maica Bay  be  made  a  solution  to  the  harbor  problem  of  Greater 
New  York.^  (2)  If  so,  what  is  the  City  doing  to  take  advantage 
of  this  solution?  Testing  Jamaica  Bay  by  the  requirements  of 
an  adequate  harbor  we  find: 

Mi/e3  from  Ambrose  Channel 
5       10       15  25 

Canarsie  Landing 
Bush  Piers 
Chelsea  Piers 

New  44^^51  Pier  |— ^—^—^—i^ 

A  SAVING  IN  DISTANCE  AND  TIME 
Although  four  miles  within  the  Bay's  entrance,  Canarsie  Landing  is  much  nearer  to 
Atlantic  connnerce  than  are  the  North  River  piers 

First — A  harbor  must  be  conveniently  located  with  refer- 
ence to  commerce — Jamaica  Bay  stands  at  New  York's  ''front 
door"  on  the  Atlantic.  It  is  adjacent  to  the  regular  path  of 
foreign  commerce  and  domestic  coastal  trade.  All  craft  enter- 
ing the  Port  of  New  York  from  the  ocean  must  pass  close  to  its 
entrance.  It  is  but  four  miles  distant  from  Ambrose  Channel 
and  within  a  mile  of  the  "four-fathom  curve."  Piers  in  Jamaica 
Bay  would  })e  from  ten  to  twelve  miles  nearer  to  ocean  traffic 
than  are  those  in  the  North  River. 

*  Col.  Lansing  H.  Beach,  Corps  of  Kngineors  of  the  Baltimore,  Md.,  District,  gives  the  waterfront 
of  the  City  of  Baltimore,  suitable  for  dockage  purposes,  as  eighteen  miles. 


40 


T     H     K        A     II     X     I     L     I     A     R     Y        H     A     R     B     ()  R 


LIVERPOOL  DOCKS 


THE  VAST  SIZE  OF  THE  "AUXILIARY  HARBOR  " 
These  drawings,  all  made  to  the  same  scale,  show  some  of  the  world's  chief  har- 
bors in  comparison  with  Jamaica  Bay.    Areas  in  black  indicate  channels,  slips  and  basins. 


A  steamer  approaching  Ambrose  Channel  from  the  sea  woukl 
travel  8^^  miles  to  Canarsie  Landing,  VSf/g  miles  to  the  Bush 
Piers  and  ISj/g  miles  to  the  new  City  piers  in  the  Chelsea  district. 
— 1907  Report  of  the  Jamaica  Bay  Improvement  Commission. 

Second — A  harbor  should  be  commodious — Few  harbors 
can  compare  with  Jamaica  Bay  in  magnitude;   many  of  the 
•  most  important  are  but  a  fraction  of  its  size. 

Here  is  the  testimony  of  a  commercial  rival — the  New 
Jersey  Harbor  Commission. — 4th  Preliminary  Report. 

There  is  ample  room  to  lay  out  a  very  complete  harbor  in  Jamaica 
Bay;  its  physical  expanse  is  so  great  that  there  is  room  within 
its  limits  to  place  the  principal  portions  of  the  harbors  of  Liver- 
pool, Antwerp,  Hamburg,  and  Rotterdam,  as  they  are  now 
constituted,  without  undue  crowding. 

This  is  substantiated  by  the  Jamaica  Bay  Improvement 
Commission,  1907  Report: 

The  amount  of  wharf  room  available  would  be  close  to  one 
hundred  miles  not  taking  into  account  the  additional  amount 
secured  by  the  erection  of  suitable  piers.  .  .  . 


41 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Another  attractive  feature  of  this  section  is  that  here  the  water- 
ways in  Jamaica  Bay  are  very  wide,  so  that  piers  of  maximum 
length  can  be  erected  when  necessary.  With  sufficient  water 
in  the  channels  leading  to  them,  the  longest  steamers  that  would 
be  built  in  the  next  forty  years  might  find  accommodation 
without  the  least  trouble.— Same  Report. 

Still  another  witness,  William  G.  Ford,  of  the  Jamaica  Bay 
Improvement  Commission,  says: 

Jamaica  Bay  is  capable  of  adding  to  the  harbor  of  New  York 
over  one  hundred  and  fifty  miles  of  wharfage.  (Note — This 
estimate  includes  the  use  of  piers.) 

Third — A  harbor  should  afford  weather  protection  to 
shipping;  the  ideal  harbor  is  land-locked — Jamaica  Bay  is  not 
only  shore-enclosed,  but  vestibuled  as  well.  The  long  arm  of 
Rockaway  Peninsula  protects  it  so  thoroughly  from  the  ocean 
that  while  a  heavy  surf  may  be  thundering  at  the  beach,  the 
surface  of  the  bay  is  scarcely  rippled.  The  frailest  craft  may 
thus  secure  safe  shelter. 

Fourth — ^A  harbor  should  have  an  easy  entrance — Jamaica 
Bay  has  an  easy  natural  entrance.  Rockaway  Inlet  has  been 
scoured  by  tidal  action  to  a  considerable  depth,  which  for  much 
of  its  length  exceeds  forty  feet.  It  may  be  easily  dredged  and 
cheaply  maintained. 

After  an  investigation  extending  over  a  number  of  years, 
the  United  States  Army  Engineers  reported  plans  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  inlet  and  recommended  that  the  work  be  executed 
and  maintained  by  the  Government.  This  the  Government 
formally  agreed  to  do  and  enacted  its  agreement  into  law,  be- 
sides making  its  first  appropriation  in  1910  for  the  purpose.* 

Fifth — A  harbor  should  serve  the  needs  of  an  important 
region — Besides  serving  the  City,  State  and  nation  as  an  integral 
part  of  New  York  Harbor,  Jamaica  Bay  would  be  closely  related 
to  the  188  square  miles  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens,  containing 
nearly  2,200,000**  population.  In  this  respect,  also,  few  har- 
bors in  the  world  are  to  be  compared  with  it. 

Note  this  statement  from  a  well  informed  authority: 
Already  the  growth  of  the  City  is  impinging  upon  its  confines 
(Jamaica  Bay)  and  improved  transit  facilities  will  soon  make  it 
as  accessible  from  City  Hall  as  the  rest  of  Queens,  the  Bronx, 
and  Staten  Island. — Former  New  York  City  Commissioner  of 
Docks,  Calvin  Tomkins. 

*  See  Appendix  (Notes  5,  6,  7,  8  and  9 — pages  86-S8). 

**The  United  States  Bureau  of  the  Census  (Bulletin  122)  estimates  the  combined  population  of 
Brooklyn  and  Queens  in  1914  as  2,173,582. 


42 


THE        AUXILIARY  HARBOR 


Photo,  by  Paul  Thompson 


BROOKLYN'S  TWO  WATERFRONTS 
This  photograph  from  the  Woohvorth   Tower   shows   the  close   approach  of 
Jamaica  Bay's  great  area  to  the  geographical  center  of  the  borough.    The  I3ay  is  seen 
in  the  background  to  the  right. 

There  is  now  about  the  Bay  a  directly  tributary  district  of 
ninety-three  square  miles,*  the  needs  of  whose  600,000**  in- 
habitants would  naturally  be  supplied  from  this  waterfront. 
It  has  been  calculated  that  a  local  commerce  of  at  least  3,200,000 
tons***  already  awaits  the  opening  of  the  Bay  and  that  this 
considerable  population  is  at  present  compelled  to  pay  excess 
cartage  of  more  than  30  cents  per  ton  ($960,000  per  year) 
through  lack  of  its  legitimate  harbor. 

Sixth — harbor  should  furnish  opportunity  to  co-ordinate 
rail  and  water  transportation — 

This  is  plain  with  a  moment's  reflection.  It  frequently 
costs  more  to  deliver  goods  than  to  produce  them;  this  may  be 
largely  a  question  of  handling.  If  merchandise  must  be  trucked 
through  miles  of  congested  streets  to  car  and  lighters,  and  by 
lighters  from  terminals  to  ships,  this  economic  waste  must  be 
added  to  the  cost  of  the  goods.  The  cost  of  men,  trucks,  horses, 
lighters  and  tugs  must  be  added  to  the  selling  price.    The  con- 

*See  Chart  (Page  51). 

**See  Appendix  (Note  16— page  94).  , 
***  See  Footnote  (Page  58). 


43 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      XE^Y  YORK 


sumer  pays  it,  and  at  this  port  it  amounts  to  several  million 
dollars  a  month. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  railroad  terminal  is  alongside 
wharfage,  transfers  may  be  made  from  car  to  ship  without  the 
expense  of  trucks  or  lighters. 

This  condition  may  be  worked  out  with  marked  simplicity 
on  the  shores  of  Jamaica  Bay,  where  it  is  possible  to  provide 
efficiently  and  inexpensively  for  an  almost  unlimited  develop- 
ment of  freight  transfer  between  rail  and  water  commerce. 

Note  the  testimony  of  these  expert  witnesses: 

The  Port  of  New  York  needs  piers  where  modern  freight  and 
passenger  steamships  may  be  brought  directly  alongside  of  rail- 
road cars. — New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission,  4th  Preliminary 
Report. 

The  Jamaica  Bay  district  is  as  adaptable  for  railroad  terminal 
and  industrial  purposes  as  for  a  frontal  harbor  for  the  Port,  and 
the  essential  point  at  present  to  keep  in  mind  is  the  desirability 
of  imposing  upon  this  whole  district  a  comprehensive  develop- 
ment plan. — Former  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks, 
Calvin  Tomkins. 

The  possibility  of  Jamaica  Bay  as  a  great  terminal  center  for 
freight  has  been  variously  discussed,  and  the  practicability  of 
maintaining  a  channel  from  the  ocean  into  the  Bay  was  regularly 
passed  upon  by  United  States  Army  engineers  a  year  ago.  The 
tracks  of  the  Pennsylvania's  connecting  railroad  pass  so  close 
to  the  Bay  that  track  access  may  be  had  to  New  England  and 
the  ^yest.  The  opportunities  for  building  extensive  piers  and 
docks  for  ocean  steamers  here  are  great,  and  the  importer  and 
exporter  would  thus  meet  on  a  common  ground  in  a  terminal 
reached  directly  by  a  railroad  trunk  line  and  ocean  steamers. 
The  development  of  Jamaica  Bay  into  a  great  basin  for  the 
docking  of  ocean  steamers,  where  deep-sea  freight  can  be  trans- 
ferred directly  to  cars,  would  undoubtedly  eliminate  many  of 
the  evils  which  congest  the  City  and  river  fronts  of  to-day. — 
George  Ethelbert  Walsh  in  "Cassiers  Magazine."  (A  technical 
magazine  of  authority.) 

At  the  head  of  the  basin  (at  Jamaica  Bay)  immediate  contact  is 
to  be  had  with  the  connecting  railroad,  giving  an  outlet  by  means 
of  the  Pennsylvania  and  New  York,  New  Haven  &  Hartford 
Railroads,  to  all  parts  of  the  United  States. — Report  of  Jamaica 
Bay  Improvement  Commission. 

In  reference  to  the  above  quotations  attention  is  called 
to  the  natural  interdependence  of  the  Connecting  Railroad  and 
the  harbor  develoi)ment  at  Jamaica  Bay.  This  high  grade, 
four-track  railroad,  the  joint  enterprise  of  the  New  York,  New 
Haven  &  Hartford,  and  the  Pennsylvania  systems,  has  been 


44 


T     II     E        A     r     X     I     L     I     A     R     Y        II     A     K     B     O  R 


constructed  for  the  purpose  of  providing  an  all-rail  connection 
for  freight  traffic,  and  for  the  purpose  of  developing  the  indus- 
trial territory  along  its  lines  in  southeastern  Brooklyn.  With 
the  completion  of  the  Hell  Gate  Bridge  it  will  be  possible  to 
bring  freight  trains  from  the  East,  the  West,  the  North  or  the 
South  to  this  district.  The  necessary  complement  to  such 
unsurpassed  railroad  facilities  is  the  provision  of  equally  efficient 
water  transportation  facilities;  these  can  be  furnished  only  by 
Jamaica  Bay. 

Seventh — An  adequate  harbor  must  include  sufficient  up- 
land adjoining  its  waterfront. — In  the  words  of  the  New  Jersey 
Harbor  Commission,  "a  series  of  piers  without  sufficient  upland 
cannot  be  made  into  a  proper  marine  terminal."  Jamaica  Bay 
can  supply  this  upland  most  economically  as  will  be  shown  in 
detail  in  a  later  chapter.  Furthermore  this  land  will  be  cheap, 
a  requirement  essential  for  harbor  purposes. 

Eighth — A  harbor  should,  if  possible,  be  easy  to  develop. — 
This  consideration  is  usually  of  minor  importance,  since  rival 
cities  are  spending  immense  sums  to  secure  adequate  harbors. 
Even  New  York  ])ours  out  large  sums  for  merely  fractional 
results.  In  this  respect,  however,  Jamaica  Bay  presents  advan- 
tages as  profitable  to  the  City  as  they  are  unusual.  The  material 
to  be  excavated  for  the  channels  is  suitable  for  the  creation  of 
new  lands  which  will  !)ecome  the  property  of  the  City.  This 
feature  will  not  only  pay  the  total  City  cost  of  developing  the 
harbor,  but  will  also  produce  a  large  profit.  This  matter  will  be 
fully  set  forth  with  detailed  facts  and  figures  in  a  later  chapter. 

The  solution  of  the  harbor  problem  of  Greater  New  York 
appears,  therefore,  to  be  simply  a  matter  of  utilizing  what  has 
been  hitherto  neglected;  to  undertake  a  project  that  engineers 
agree  to  be  simple  and  economical — and  one  that  can  be  made 
to  pay  for  itself  as  it  progresses. 

This,  however,  is  not  a  new  suggestion.  It  is  the  judgment 
of  eminent  authorities,  and  the  decision  of  the  Army  engineers, 
that  the  true  solution  to  the  problem  lies  only  in  Jamaica  Bay. 
In  reference  to  this  matter  the  following  decisive  statement  of 
so  eminent  an  engineer  as  Dr.  Elmer  L.  Corthell  cannot  suc- 
cessfully be  disputed: 

The  harbor  solution  for  Greater  New  York  is  in  Jamaica  Bay. 
In  any  European  country  it  would  be  eagerly  occupied  for  com- 
mercial purposes  when  as  near  to  existing  ports  and  as  accessi- 
ble as  this  is  to  New  York. 


45 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Again  he  states: 
From  my  personal  knowledge  Mr.   Calvin  Tomkins,  former 
Commissioner  of  Docks,  was  correct  when  he  stated  "The  ports 
of  Antwerp,  Manchester,  Liverpool  and  Hamburg  have  been 
developed  in  the  face  of  natural  adverse  conditions  much  more 
dijBBcult  to  adapt  to  modern  commercial  needs,  than  are  those 
existing  at  Jamaica  Bay."    And  he  might  have  included  many 
other  important  ports  of  the  world. 
The  judgment  of  Col.  John  G.  D.  Knight,  of  the  United 
States  Army  Board  of  Engineers,  who  investigated  and  re- 
ported on  the  project  for  the  United  States  Government,  is 
equally  decisive.    He  says:* 

It  is  thought  that  in  ten  years  available  waterfront  for  wharfage 
along  Manhattan  and  in  Upper  New  York  will  be  exhausted. 
Provision  for  additional  frontage  must  be  made,  which  provision 
should  be  on  New  York  Bay,  if  practicable,  and  Jamaica  Bay 
affords  the  only  site  for  such  addition. 
This  general  conclusion  has  been  supported  time  and  again 
by  official  investigators.    It  is  the  judgment  of  numerous  civic 
and  trade  organizations  in  the  City  of  New  York.   It  is  endorsed 
by  official  boards  of  the  City,  State  and  National  Govern- 
ments.** 

Condensing  into  a  few  lines  a  statement  of  facts  which  are 
all  matters  of  official  record  and  subject  to  easy  verification,  we 
find  that  the  Jamaica  Bay  Improvement  Commission,  appointed 
by  the  Mayor  in  1906,  spent  several  years  in  studying  the 
situation  and  urgently  recommended  that  the  City  improve 
Jamaica  Bay  for  a  harbor  (Reports  of  1907  and  1909);  that 
the  United  States  Board  of  Engineers  after  a  thorough  inves- 
tigation recommended  that  the  Government  develop  the  main 
interior  channel  of  Jamaica  Bay  as  far  as  Cornell  Creek;  that 
Congress  authorized  an  ultimate  expenditure  of  $7,430,000  for 
this  purpose  upon  condition  that  the  City  construct  the  neces- 
sary dock  and  basins;  that  Congress  has  made  preliminary 
appropriations  of  over  $850,000;  that  the  New  York  City 
Government  appropriated  $1,000,000  to  begin  its  part  of  the 
work  three  years  ago;  that  the  State  of  New  York  in  1909 
endorsed  the  project  and  co-operated  by  enacting  the  Sargent 
Law  which  ceded  to  the  City  all  its  rights  to  the  lands  lying  in 
and  about  Jamaica  Bay;  and  that  a  section  of  the  channel, 
including  the  entrance,  was  actually  dredged  by  the  Federal 
Government  in  1913. 

♦Congressional  Record,  February  24,  1910  (Page  2318). 
**  See  Appendix  (Notes  1  to  12— pages  81-90). 


46 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  KEY 


(PART  TWO  —  THE  SOLUTION) 

CHAPTER  VI 

The  Key  to  the  Industrial  Future  of 
Greater  New  York 

It  is  to  be  remembered  that  industrial  development  of  factory 
construction  is  of  more  importance  locally  to  the  City  than  is 
its  commercial  development;  railroad  sidings  to  factory  sites 
on  the  back  lands  near  the  waterfront  are  at  least  as  essential 
to  successful  municipal  progress  as  is  commercial  development 
atthew^aterfront. — Ex-Commissioner  of  Docks  Calvin  Tomkins. 

y^"^  CORES  of  cities  throughout  the  United  States  are  push- 
ing  aggressive  campaigns  to  attract  new  industries. 
These  campaigns  are  well-planned  and  make  up  in 
k^^^  enthusiasm  what  they  lack  in  modesty.  If  a  city  has 
water-power,  natural  gas,  oil,  coal,  shipping  facilities,  iron  ore, 
hardwood  supplies,  an  agricultural  basis  or  even  a  "climate," 
the  Administration  or  the  Board  of  Trade  capitalizes  its  resource 
to  the  utmost  extent  and  begins  a  vigorous  canvass  for  manu- 
facturers. What  can  be  thus  accomplished  w^as  shown  by 
Detroit  in  the  automobile  industry,  of  which  New-  York  could 
doubtless  have  had  a  large  share  had  it  exerted  itself. 

Until  recently,  how^ever,  such  organized  effort  has  rarely 
characterized  New  York  for  the  great  City  has  been  almost 
wholl}^  lacking  in  self-consciousness,  save  at  the  emotional 
crises  of  some  of  its  campaigns.  Then  it  has  been  seen  to 
emerge  for  a  moment,  only  to  disappear  again  in  the  disinte- 
grated multitude  of  busy  New^  Yorkers — each  intent  upon  his 
individual  affairs. 

Greater  New  York  w^ith  matchless  resources  to  attract  new 
industries  is  only  beginning,  through  the  public-spirited  efforts 
of  the  Merchants'  Association,  the  Chamber  of  Commerce, 
and  similar  bodies,  to  consider  how  these  resources  may  be 
available.  That  the  CitV  should  have  continued  to  gain,  indus- 
trially, in  the  face  of  such  inertia  proves  its  natural  attractiveness. 

The  first  requisite,  of  course,  is  to  find  the  resources  and 
then  organize  them.  Mr.  William  A.  Marble,  President  of  the 
Merchants'  ^Association,  recognized  this  necessity  when  he  said: 

With  perhaps  one  exception  in  previous  plans  made  for  the 
development  of  specific  localities,  little  or  no  attempt  has  been 
made  to  co-ordinate  rail  and  w^ater  traffic,  to  minimize  cartage, 


47 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


and  no  general  application  of  economic  and  engineering  princi- 
ples has  been  applied  to  the  general  terminal  facilities  and  rail 
or  water  transportation  interests.* 

Then  he  laid  down,  as  already  quoted,  the  four  main  essentials 
of  an  ideal  community,  viz: 

(a)  Cheap  lands  for  industrial  sites  and  low  rental  charges. 

(b)  Close  proximity  and  easy  access  to  rail  or  water  carriage. 

(c)  Reasonable  proximity  to  labor  markets  and  homes,  and 
easy  access  thereto  for  cartage. 

(d)  Readily  and  always  obtainable  food  supplies  with  eco- 
nomical facilities  for  distribution. 

These  conditions  cannot  be  found  upon  Manhattan  Island. 
Really,  this  statement  is  too  self-evident  to  need  argument,  but 
there  was  a  highly  interesting  suggestion,  made  in  1911  by  the 
Committee  of  Factories  of  the  New  York  City  Commission  on 
Congestion,  that  will  justify  a  moment's  pause: 

The  Committee  feels  (says  the  report)  that  the  only  way  to 
prevent  the  location  of  more  factories  in  Manhattan  is  abso- 
lutely to  prohibit  their  location  in  the  Borough  or  in  certain 
sections  of  the  Borough,  where,  as  has  been  shown  by  the  pre- 
ceding statement,  their  presence  either  constitutes  a  menace  to 
the  health  of  the  workers  in  the  factories  or  puts  upon  them 
and  ultimately  upon  the  consumers  of  the  goods  a  heavy  and 
unnecessary  cost  of  carfare,  truckage  and  breaking  bulk. 

On  the  basis  of  municipal  economy  the  report  continues: 
Factories  in  the  center  of  Manhattan  involve  a  tremendous  cost 
also  to  the  City  in  the  wear  and  tear  upon  the  streets  and  in 
delaying  traffic,  and  from  this  point  of  view  a  direct  injury  to 
the  City  itself.  The  prohibition  of  factories  in  certain  districts 
has  ample  precedents  in  foreign  countries.  Many  cities  in  Ger- 
many, Austria,  France  and  Switzerland  have  laws  which  abso- 
lutely prohibit  the  locating  of  factories  except  in  districts 
designated  by  the  City. 

At  this  point  it  is  evident  that  the  industrial  and  congestion 
problems  are  so  closely  knit  that  the  solution  of  one  will  lead 
to  the  solution  of  the  other.  This  solution  will  hardly  be  found 
in  any  drastic  prohibition,  but  rather  in  a  constructive  plan  for 
encouraging  new  industries  to  occupy  the  present  unproductive 
lands  in  the  neglected  parts  of  Greater  New  York,  thereby 
increasing  the  producing  power,  the  earning  power,  the  spend- 
ing power,  and  the  civic  health  of  the  whole  City.  Manhattan, 
the  heart  of  the  City,  must  remain  for  all  time  the  financial, 
administrative,  office,  shopping,  and  travel  headquarters  for 
Greater  New  York,  but  it  does  not  hold  and  cannot  desire  to 

*  See  Appendix  (Note  42 — page  119). 


48 


THE  INDUS     T     R     I     A     L  K     E  Y 


^HiliiiiAifJi&A'iiif^^HHiMRi^J 

"CLOSE  PROXIMITY  TO  WATER  CARRIAGE  ' 
A  light-draft  boat  lanrling  raw  material  at  a  waterfront  factory  on  Mill  Basin 
(Jamaica  Bay).    A  slight  expenditure  would  make  it  possible  to  bring  ocean  cargo 
vessels  into  the  heart  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens. 


hold  the  sohition  of  the  industrial  problem.  It  has  more  im- 
portant functions  to  perform.  Overcrowded,  overhurried  Man- 
hattan needs  nothing  so  much  as  Relief.  Its  ultimate  j^ros- 
perity  must  be  materially  enhanced  by  a  fair  division  with  its 
sister  boroughs  of  the  civic  responsibility. 

President  Marble's  solution,  therefore,  must  be  sought  in 
the  other  boroughs  in  each  of  which  may  be  discovered  one  or 
two  of  the  qualifications.  Brooklyn,  for  examjile,  j^resents 
twelve  different  centers  of  varying  size  and  adaptability,  which 
are  enumerated  in  a  recent  publication  of  the  Brooklyn  League.* 
In  the  whole  City,  however,  there  is  one  location  where  all  four 
of  the  established  requirements  may  l)e  found  in  a  pre-eminent 
degree;  one  location  where  a  sufficiently  large  industrial  de- 
velopment may  be  planned  upon  ''low  priced  lands  adjacent  to 
adequate  and  cheaply  obtainable  harbor  facilities";  where  the 
expense  of  first  cost  and  operation  of  terminals  and  factories 
may  be  reduced  to  a  minimum;  and  where  the  heavy  tariff  of 
trucking  expense  may  be  eliminated. 

This  location  for  "an  ideal  industrial  city"  adjoins  the 
bay  in  which  we  have  already  found  the  solution  to  the  harbor 
problem — Jamaica  Bay.  This  is  the  way  it  squares  up  with 
President  Marble's  four  requirements: 

(a)    Cheap  lands  for  industrial  sites  and  low  rental  charges — 

There  are  9,000  acres  of  unreclaimed  land  lying  adjacent 
to  Jamaica  Bay,  with  an  average  valuation  to-day  of  approxi- 
mately $1,000  per  acre.  This  land  may  be  reclaimed  for  about 
$2,000  per  acre,  making  a  total  cost  of  $3,000  per  acre.  Land  at 
this  price  near  deep  water  within  New  York  City  is  undeniabl}^ 
"cheap  land";  a  10%  rental  rate  would  be  but  $25  per  month 
per  acre  which  is  certainly  a  "low  rental  charge." 

*  "Brooklyn,  a  National  Center  of  Commerce  and  Industry"  (1914). 

49 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(b)  Close  proximity  and  easy  access  to  rail  and  water  carriage — 
The  development  of  an  industrial  harbor,  more  fully  dis- 
cussed in  the  next  chapter,  will  make  it  possible  for  cargo 
steamers  from  all  parts  of  the  world  to  find  wharfage  immedi- 
ately adjacent  to  factories  here  established.  This  will  make 
easy  and  inexpensive  the  receipt  of  supplies  and  the  shipment 
of  the  finished  products.  These  advantages  for  concerns  doing 
an  export  business  will  be  very  great.  The  Connecting  Railway 
and  its  extensions  will  afford  a  rail  outlet  to  the  whole  of  the 
United  States  and  Canada. 

(c)  Reasonable  proximity  to  labor  markets  and  homes  and 
easy  access  thereto  for  cartage — 

New  York  Cit}^  contains  a  plentiful  supply  of  every  kind 
of  labor.  Jamaica  Bay  projects  into  Brooklyn  and  Queens,  two 
boroughs  forming  a  geographical  unit.  They  contain  between 
them  61%  of  the  City's  area,  68%  of  its  waterfront,  and  40% 
of  its  population.  Their  population  is  nearly  2,200,000,  or  about 
equal  to  that  of  Chicago  and  closely  approaching  the  population 
of  Manhattan.  Moreover,  they  are  growing  at  a  tremendous 
rate.  According  to  the  estimate  made  by  the  Board  of  Water 
Supply  their  population  will  equal  that  of  Manhattan  in  little 
more  than  a  decade  and  will  exceed  it  b}^  50%  in  1940.  But 
note  that  their  combined  area  is  120,000  acres,  which  is  nine 
times  that  of  Manhattan  Island.  This  means  that  these  bor- 
oughs are  capable  of  sustaining  a  population  of  12,000,000  with 
a  comfortable  distribution  of  but  100  persons  to  an  acre.  The 
Jamaica  Bay  district  alone  exceeds  ninety-three  square  miles  in 
area,  which  is  more  than  four  times  as  large  as  ^Manhattan,  and 
more  than  twice  as  large  as  the  Bronx.  The  rapid  transit  sys- 
tem is  now  being  extended  into  this  district  which  abounds  in 
desirable  home  sites.  It  will  be  possible  for  thousands  of 
workers  to  live  under  comfortable  and  healthful  conditions, 
without  congestion,  and  within  walking  distance  of  employment. 

(d)  Readily  and  always  obtainable  food  supplies  with  eco- 
nomical facilities  for  distribution — 

The  construction  of  basins  as  planned  by  the  City's  en- 
gineers and  as  fully  discussed  in  the  next  chapter,  will  enable 
supplies  to  be  brought  by  water  into  the  interior  of  the  two 
boroughs  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens.  This  will  provide  the  most 
economical  of  all  means  for  the  receipt  of  food  and  other  sup- 
plies.*   Near  at  hand,  also,  are  extensive  truck  gardens. 

*  See  Footnote  (Page  58). 


50 


THE  INDUSTRIAL  KEY 


A  GREAT  CITY  WITH  AX  IDLE  HARBOR* 

The  26th,  29th,  31st  and  32nd  wards  of  Brooklyn,  and  the  4th  and  5th  wards  of 
Queens  lie  in  a  semi-circle  around  Jamaica  Bay.  They  are  bounded  on  the  west,  north 
and  east  by  the  heavy  line  on  the  above  map,  and  on  the  south  by  Jamaica  Bay.  The 
population  in  this  territory  in  1910  was  378,609.  The  rate  of  increase  from  1900  to 
1910  was  146%.  Using  this  rate  for  estimate  from  1910  to  1914,  the  present  popula- 
tion would  be  599,716.  The  building  operations  in  1913  amounted  to  approximately 
$20,000,000.  The  real  estate  taxes  paid  by  these  wards  in  1914  exceeded  $8,400,000. 
This  district,  in  itself  a  great  city,  is  unjustly  deprived  of  its  natural  harbor.  At  pres- 
ent its  suppHes  (estimated  at  3,200,000  tons  annually)  must  be  trucked  from  the 
distant  waterfront  of  the  East  River  or  Upper  Bay,  or  else  brought  in  by  railroad  under 
heavy  tariff.  The  district  is  thus  put  to  an  unnecessary  transportation  expense  of  at 
least  $960,000  per  annum  through  the  city's  failure  to  carry  out  its  agreement  to  de- 
velop Jamaica  Bay.    (See  pages  43  and  48.) 

Here,  then,  in  Jamaica  Bay,  we  find  the  solution  to  our 
commercial  problem  and  to  our  industrial  problem;  here  we 
find  an  unparalleled  opportunity  to  plan  a  comprehensive  indus- 
trial district  many  miles  in  extent,  on  a  vast  industrial  harbor, 
where  factories  of  any  magnitude  may  be  built  upon  lands  of 

*  Note  Map  of  Borough  of  Brooklyn  in  accompanying  folder. 


51 


THE      P  R  O  B  L  E  IVI      OF      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      N  E  W      Y  ()  R  K 


trifling  cost  and  have  direct  access  to  rail  and  water  transpor- 
tation; where  trucking  and  lightering  may  be  practically  elimi- 
nated, and  export  trade  may  be  cultivated  with  unprecedented 
facility.  It  has  already  been  recognized  that  the  islands  in 
Jamaica  Bay  afford  an  ideal  site  for  the  much  discussed  "Free 
Port,"*  such  as  that  which  has  brought  great  prosperity  to 
the  City  of  Hamburg. 

Now  add  to  these  advantages  an  unlimited  supply  of  every 
kind  of  labor;  adjacent  home  sites  where  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  workers  may  live  in  freedom  from  tenement-bred  evils; 
access  to  the  richest  market  on  the  continent;  the  commercial 
and  financial  prestige  of  a  New  York  City  location — all  avail- 
able within  the  limits  of  New  York  City — and  it  is  scarcely 
reasonable  to  doubt  that  the  City's  industrial  problem  is  solved. 

It  appears  certain  that  with  advantages  such  as  these  the 
eyes  of  manufacturing  America  will  be  directed  toward  New 
York's  industrial  harbor,  and  that  the  resulting  influx  of  capital 
and  enterprise  will  exceed  all  precedent.  This  development 
should  ultimately  return  to  the  City  many  of  the  long-banished 
heavy  industrial  lines,  requiring  extensive  ground  space  and 
employing  armies  of  workers.  It  will  provide  opportunity  for 
the  expansion  of  those  essentially  New  York  City  industries 
the  growth  of  which  has  been  limited  heretofore  by  the  excessive 
cost  of  adequate  facilities.  It  will  afford  much  needed  space  for 
warehouses  and  elevators  upon  a  large  scale — a  development  in 
itself  of  considerable  importance.  It  will  be,  in  fact,  the  broad- 
est manufacturing  opportunity  that  has  ever  been  made  avail- 
able in  the  history  of  American  trade. 

That  these  will  be  the  natural  results  of  the  opening  of 
thousands  of  acres  of  low-priced  land  in  the  Jamaica  Bay  dis- 
trict to  water  transportation  is  shown  by  the  experience  of  other 
cities.  In  England,  for  exam])le,  the  opening  of  the  INIanchester 
Ship  Canal  was  followed  by  a  remarkable  influx  of  large  indus- 
tries, all  eager  to  obtain  sites  adjoining  deep  water. 

Thus,  not  only  are  the  four  keys  to  the  industrial  situation 
in  Greater  New  York  to  be  found  in  Jamaica  Bay — but  it  is 
the  master-key  that  unlocks  unlimited  opportunities.  Were 
its  facilities  made  available.  Greater  New  York  would  rapidly 
attain  a  many-sided  industrial  prosperity  beyond  precedent. 

*  See  Appendix  (Notes  40  and  41). 


52 


C  R    E  A  T  I  N  G        :M  U  X  I   C  I  P  A  L 


W  E  A  L  T  H 


(PART  THREE  —  THE  PR0GRA:M) 

CHAPTER  VII 

How  to  Create  Municipal  Wealth  While 
Solving  the  City's  Problem 

The  City  is  dealing  with  a  big  project,  and  while  proceeding 
with  caution  and  due  regard  for  reasonable  economy,  it  should 
remember  that  the  money  devoted  to  this  project  is  an  invest- 
ment for  the  City  rather  than  an  exi)enditure. — Ex-Congress- 
man Charles  B.  Law,  in  a  si)eech  upon  Jamaica  Bay  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  Eebruary  14,  1910. 

WE  have  discussed  the  three  fold  aspect  of  New 
York's  Problem — its  coinniercial  needs,  its  indus- 
trial needs,  and  its  congestion  evil,  and  have  dis- 
covered a  solution  for  it.  But  in  considering  any 
business  project,  public  or  private,  it  always  is  necessary  to 
count  the  cost;  to  strike  a  balance  between  the  promised  advan- 
tage and  the  rec{uired  outlay. 

At  this  point  there  appears  a  seeming  ])aradox — a  condi- 
tion so  strange  and  imexpected  that  at  first  it  seems  incredible. 
THERE  IS  XO  EXPENSE  TO  THE  CITY  I 
There  is,  to  be  sure,  a  slight  civic  investment,  at  an  imme- 
diate and  somewhat  startling  profit,  but  there  is  no  expense 
whatever.  And,  as  with  most  paradoxes,  the  explanation  is 
elementally  simple;  it  is  merely  this: 

a — Xew  York  owns  Jamaica  Bay — a  potential  harl)or  that 
needs  but  the  dredging  of  channels  and  basins  to  give  it  value. 

b — There  are  thousands  of  acres  of  marsh  and  shoal  about 
the  Bay  that  need  the  dredged  soil  to  give  them  value, 
c — The  new  land  thus  created  will  be  City  property. 
The  program  therefore  merely  resolves  itself  into  taking  the 
soil  from  the  Bay  where  it  is  not  needed,  and  putting  it  on  the 
land  where  it  is  needed. 

And  an  immediate  result — a  "by-product"  of  the  improv- 
ment,  will  be  the  saving  each  year  of  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
dollars  of  unnecessary  present  expense  to  the  six  hundred 
thousand  New  Yorkers  living  adjacent  to  Jamaica  Bay. 
All  of  which  remains  to  be  demonstrated. 
Consider,  then,  that  under  ordinary  dredging  conditions,  as 
for  example,  in  the  X  orth  and  East  Rivers,  it  is  necessary  to  load 
the  excavated  material  into  scows,  to  be  towed  out  to  sea  and 


53 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Courtesy  The  Brooklyn  Eagle 


OPENING  THE  BAY'S  MAIN  CHANNEL 
A  hydraulic  dredge  at  work  in  Jamaica  Bay,  in  1913,  upon  a  section  of  the 
main  channel.     The  soil  raised  from  the  bottom  is  forced  through  the  pipe  shown  in 
the  foreground. 

discharged.  The  cost  of  transportation  constitutes  substantially 
fifty  per  cent  of  the  cost  of  the  improvement.  The  situation  at 
Jamaica  Bay,  however,  eliminates  this  waste  and  replaces  it  with 
profits.  For  here,  adjacent  to  the  surveyed  channels  and  basins, 
are  shoals  and  marshes  that  need  the  soil  as  greatly  as  the  chan- 
nels need  to  be  free  of  it.  Every  cubic  yard  of  soil,  therefore, 
may  be  deposited  on  the  shore,  and  thereby  accomplish  a  two- 
fold purpose.  The  City  may  build  a  harbor  and  create  new, 
publicly-owned,  harbor  front  property  in  one  simple  operation. 

It  therefore  is  pertinent  to  inquire:  What  will  be  the  cost 
of  this  dredging,  and  what  will  be  the  value  of  the  land  it  will 
create?  In  short;  what  are  to  be  the  profits? 

The  figures  to  be  presented  in  answering  this  question  have 
been  worked  out  with  care  by  conservative  engineers.  It  is  a 
project  that  may  be  developed  as  slowly  or  as  rapidly  as  the 
needs  of  the  City  demand.  It  would  be  unreasonable  to  assume 
— and  no  one  with  a  knowledge  of  the  conditions  would  suggest — 
that  the  whole  harbor  project  should  be  developed  immediately. 
This  would  far  exceed  necessity;  it  would  be  equally  ridiculous 
to  advocate  the  immediate  opening  of  all  the  streets  laid  down 
upon  the  City  maps  or  to  urge  the  immediate  construction  of 
all  the  subwa^^s  which  have  been  approved  and  incorporated  in 
the  rapid  transit  map.  Jamaica  Bay  stands  on  the  same  footing 
as  any  other  constructive  enterprise.  It  is  necessary  only  to 
make  a  beginning,  and  then  let  the  expansion  meet  the  require- 
ments step  by  step,  during  a  period  of  years,  under  intelligent 
direction  and  upon  a  comprehensive  basis. 


54 


CREATING        MUNICIPAL  WEALTH 


Courtesy  The  Brooklyn  Eagle 


MUNICIPAL  WEALTH  AS  A  BY-PRODUCT 
The  discharge  from  the  pipe  in  process  of  creating  new,  city-owned,  waterfront  land. 
Water  formerly  covered  the  site  where  the  men  are  standing. 

The  first  step,  therefore,  is  to  organize  a  scientific  plan 
that  will  adapt  itself  to  the  immediate  needs  of  Greater  New 
York  and  provide  for  generations  of  steady  expansion,  somewhat 
as  is  being  done  in  the  harbor  of  Antwerp. 

A  draft  of  such  a  plan  is  here  suggested  (see  next  page). 

It  will  be  seen  on  this  map  that  the  plan  to  develop  Jamaica 
Bay  consists  of  a  series  of  progressive  steps;  that  each  step  is 
complete  in  itself,  and  need  be  taken  only  when  conditions  re- 
quire it.  It  will  now  be  seen  that  each  of  these  developments 
will  pay  for  itself,  and  that  the  money  for  the  first  investment 
is  already  available. 

First — The  Money — Not  one  dollar  in  new  appropriations 
is  at  present  required.  The  funds  are  ready  and  waiting.  The 
United  States  Government  has  agreed  to  provide  the  entrance 
and  to  pay  the  entire  cost  of  dredging  the  main  channel;  the 
State  has  ceded  its  title  to  all  the  lands  under  water;  and  the 
City  possesses  the  funds  necessary  to  build  the  basins,  which 
funds,  having  been  appropriated  for  this  specific  purpose,  can 
be  used  for  no  other.  A  detailed  statement  of  these  funds  is 
exhibited  on  page  82. 

The  financial  situation,  then,  is  this:  The  Government  has 
adopted  a  program  calling  for  the  ultimate  expenditure  on  its 
part  of  $7,430,000.  Upon  this  program  it  has  already  made 
appropriations  of  $850,500,  of  which  $695,720  is  still  un-ex- 
pended.  The  City  has  appropriated  $1,000,000,  of  which 
$923,220   remains  unexpended,  a  total  balance  of  $1,618,940. 

Second — The  Results — The  preliminary  work  already  done 
proves  the  practicability  of  the  project.    The  United  States 


55 


THE      P  R  O  B  L  E  M      O  E      G  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  ^\      Y  0  R  K 


THE  FIRST  TWO  STEPS 
The  partial  development  of  Mill  and  Fresh  Creek  Basins  fsee  also  pages  59  and  61)  will 
meet  the  most  imperative  needs  without  exceeding  funds  now  in  hand.    Instead  of  being 
temporary  relief  measures,  they  will  be  progressive  steps  upon  a  constructive  harbor  plan. 


Government  in  its  preliminary  dredging  upon  the  main  interior 
channel  has  completed  8,000  feet,  18  feet  deep,  and  500  feet 
wide.  This  has  cost  but  $135,000.  It  also  has  expended  $19,780 
upon  the  entrance  channel,  or  a  total  of  $154,780.  New  York 
City  in  this  same  preliminary  work  spent  but  $26,779.02  of  its 
appropriation  in  engineering  and  incidental  expenses.  The  soil 
was  dredged  from  the  channel  at  Federal  expense  and  discharged 
back  of  a  bulkhead,  with  the  result  that  it  immediately  created 
a  strip  of  new  land  700  feet  wide  and  7,000  feet  long,  or  about 
112  acres  in  area. 

Stopping  here  to  summarize  the  situation,  before  proceed- 
ing to  a  detailed  examination  of  the  plan,  it  is  seen  that  the 
expenditure  of  $135,000  by  the  Federal  Government  upon  this 
stretch  of  channel  has  incidentalh^  given  to  the  Cit}^  112  acres 
of  new  land  of  some  immediate  and  of  great  future  value.  This 
was  accomplished  at  an  expense  to  the  Cit}^  of  only  $26,779, 
which  under  ordinary  circumstances  would  all  have  been  charged 
up  to  the  cost  of  the  harbor  development. 

An  inventory,  then,  shows  as  a  present  result  of  the  pre- 
liminary work:  8,000  feet  of  main  channel.  112  acres  of  new 
land,  the  property  of  the  City.  $1,618,940  still  in  hand  (includ- 
ing $923,220  of  New  York  City's  appropriation). 


T      II      K         15      A      L      A      N       C      E         S      H      E      E  T 


(PART  T  H  R  E  E  —  T  H  E  PR  O  G  R  A  M 

CHAPTER  VIII 

The  Balance  Sheet — A  Statement  of  Profits 

Had  this  recommendation  of  the  Harbor  Board  been  approved, 
it  would  have  given  a  working  capital  large  enough,  not  only 
to  take  care  of  the  immediate  needs  of  the  shippers,  but 
would  have  further  enabled  the  City  to  l)uy  unimproved  water- 
front })ro})erty,  construct  bulkheads  and  reclaim  large  areas  of 
land,  admirably  located  for  manufacturing  and  industrial  pur- 
poses.— From  Re])ort  of  Oscar  F.  Lackey,  Chief  Engineer  of 
Harbor  of  Baltimore. 

IT  appears  that  a  cash  balance  of  $1,618,940  is  now  availal)lc 
for  the  next  steps  to  be  taken  in  this  project.  How  shall 
this  amount  be  used  to  get  the  largest  benefits.^ 
The  closest  scrutiny  of  the  following  discussion  is  invited. 
Necessity  has  required  estimates  of  values  and  costs,  but  in  all 
cases  these  are  the  result  of  careful  investigation  and  are  believed 
to  be  uniformly  conservative.  The  reader,  if  he  desire,  may  make 
independent  calculations  using  his  own  estimates  of  value. 
This  may  make  a  slight  relative  difference  in  individual  figures 
but  it  cannot  affect  the  conclusions. 

If  the  reader  will  turn  to  the  map  on  page  56,  he  w^ill  find 
that  by  a  comprehensive  plan  fsimilar  in  principle  to  that  of 
Antwerp)  the  harbor  develo})ment  at  Jamaica  Bay  is  divided 
into  several  progressive  steps,  })ut  one  of  which  need  be  con- 
sidered at  a  time. 

First  Progressive  Step — The  first  step  is  simple  and  eco- 
nomical. It  involves  improving  the  section  extending  from  the 
harl)or  entrance  to  and  inclusive  of  the  first  basin,  known  as 
Mill  Basin.  This  basin  extends  inland  from  the  main  channel 
for  approximately  two  miles.  The  main  channel  has  already 
been  dredged  as  far  as  the  entrance  to  this  basin  at  the  expense 
of  the  Federal  Government.  By  the  expenditure  of  $236,500  of 
the  funds  available,  it  is  possible  to  dredge  and  bulkhead  this 
basin  where  necessary,  and  to  erect  500  linear  feet  of  wharf  at 
its  head.  This  will  make  it  immediately  feasible  to  bring 
supplies  by  water  to  the  foot  of  Flatbush  Avenue,  in  the  vicinity 
of  an  important  and  raj)idly  growing  section  of  Brooklyn,  which 
already  has  a  i)opulation  of  approximately  160,000. 

Now  note  the  returns  from  the  expenditure  of  $236,500. 

57 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Mill  Basin  should  be  handling  freight  of  more  than  800,000 
tons*  within  a  year  from  the  time  of  its  completion.  At  a 
saving  of  but  30  cents  per  ton**  over  the  cost  of  methods  of 
transportation  now  in  use  this  would  amount  to  $240,000  annu- 
ally, or  an  annual  return  to  the  community  of  more  than  100% 
upon  the  expenditure  of  the  City  in  this  one  item,  the  elimi- 
nation of  unnecessary  transportation  expense. 

In  dredging  this  basin,  the  City  will  reclaim  approximately 
fifty  acres  of  public  land  directly  on  the  channel  (see  map  on 
opposite  page).  At  17,500  per  acre,  the  assessed  valuation  of 
waterfront  on  Barren  Island,  it  will  be  worth  $375,000. 

The  extension  of  this  channel  will  also  give  some  value  to 
the  one  hundred  and  twelve  acres  of  Cit}^  land  already  reclaimed 
by  the  excavation  of  the  main  channel,  as  it  will  at  once  provide 
deep  water  at  one  end  of  the  strip.  At  the  moderate  average 
value  of  $2,000  per  acre,  this  fill  will  be  worth  $224,000. 

The  continued  improvement  of  Mill  Basin  will  involve  the 
extension  of  the  wharf  around  its  margin  as  required.  The 
rental  of  this  wharfage  will  yield  at  once  a  considerable  revenue, 
as  it  should  be  built  only  as  rapidly  as  may  be  justified  by  the 
demand.  The  first  expenditure  provides  for  only  500  feet  as 
indicated,  and  from  applications  already  filed  it  is  probably 
that  this  will  be  immediately  occupied. 

It  appears,  then,  that  by  the  expenditure  of  $236,500  of 
present  funds,  it  is  possible  to  develop  resources  that  will  give 
real  estate  worth  $599,000  to  the  City  and  will  save  $240,000 
annually,  in  expense,  to  the  residents  of  Brooklyn. 

*  This  is  based  upon  an  allowance  for  all  materials  of  5.37  tons  per  capita  annually,  as  assumed  by 
the  Jamaica  Bay  Improvement  Commission  who  examined  and  reported  upon  the  project  in  behalf  of  the  City. 

**  "Of  the  three  methods  of  transportation,  it  is  estimated  that  the  relative  cost  under  present  con- 
ditions is  six-tenths  of  a  mill  per  ton  mile  for  water,  four  mills  per  ton  mile  for  railway  and  fifty  cents  per  ton 
mile  for  wagon  transportation. 

"It  is  clear  that  water  transportation  should  be  used  wherever  possible,  and  wagon  transportation 
as  little  as  possible." — Preliminary  Report  to  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Chicago  by  the  Chicago  Municipal 
Markets  Commission,  April  27,  1914,  Page  19. 

Wm.  J.  Wilgus  formerly  Vice-President  of  the  New  York  Central  and  Hudson  River  Railroad  states 
that  "the  average  cost  of  hauling  from  waterfront  on  Manhattan  Island  to  consignee  is  eighty  cents  per 
ton."  The  average  haul  is  between  one  and  two  miles;  say  1 14  miles.  This  gives  fifty-three  cents  per  ton  mile. 

Mr.  Wilgus  also  states  as  follows:  "This  cost  is  found  to  vary  from  as  low  as  40  cents  per  ton  for  short 
hauls  of  heavy  merchandise  under  favorable  conditions,  to  as  high  as  ten  dollars  per  ton  for  isolated  shipments 
for  long  distances." 

A  contracting  firm  which  does  much  trucking  in  New  York  City  states:  "the  average  cost  of  hauling 
is  thirty-fire  cents  per  ton  mile."  _ 

The  cost  of  hauling  in  city  streets  varies,  according  to  these  several  authorities,  from  thirty-five  to 
fifty  cents  per  ton  mile.  The  use  of  the  Jamaica  Bay  waterfront  would  effect  for  the  tributary  district  an 
average  saving  in  haul  of  two  miles.  This  means  at  the  conservative  figure  of  thirty  cents  per  ton  mile  a 
saving  of  sixty  cents  per  ton. 

On  many  materials  such  as  lumber  and  brick  and  other  clay  products  brought  in  via  the  Amboys. 
this  sixty  cents  per  ton  represents  a  net  saving,  for  they  may  be  landed  on  Jamaica  Bay  waterfront  as 
easily  and  economically  as  at  any  other  point  in  New  York  Harbor;  some,  however,  must  be  lightered 
from  the  Upper  Bay  to  Jamaica  Bay.  This  operation  may  be  performed  for  thirty  cents  per  ton,  leaving 
a  net  saving  to  the  tributary  district  of  at  least  thirty  cents  per  ton.  ^  Although  this  figure  as  will  be  seen 
from  the  above  is  a  minimum  we  have  used  it  throughout  the  discussion. 


58 


THE        BALANCE  SHEET 


This  may  be  stated  in  another  way:  An  expenditure  at 
Jamaica  Bay  of  less  money  than  the  City  will  pay  for  two  years' 
interest  upon  the  funds  used  in  building  one  new  pier  at  44th 
Street,  will  pay  New  York  an  immediate  profit  of  150%  and 
will  save  New  York  citizens  an  additional  100%  per  year! 

This  will  consume  but  a  small  part  of  the  present  available 
funds,  and  the  second  step  may  follow  at  once. 

59 


T  H  E 


r  11  O  B  L  E  M 


O  E      G  R  E  A  T  E  11     N  E  W      Y  ()  K  K 


Second  Progressive  Step — The  second  step  is  probably 
the  most  important  and  the  most  profitable  now  in  contemphi- 
tion.  It  is  the  opening  of  Fresh  Creek  Basin,  from  a  point  2}^ 
miles  beyond  Mill  Basin.  This  will  provide  water  transporta- 
tion facilities  to  the  already  densely  populated  Brownsville 
district  with  its  250,000  inhabitants,  a  city  in  itself  larger  than 
Providence,  R.  I.  According  to  the  plan  which  has  been  pre- 
pared, this  basin  can  be  extended  to  Avenue  E,  a  distance  of 
nearly  two  miles  from  the  channel,  and  1,000  feet  of  wharf  can 
be  built  at  its  head  for  $571,272,  allowing  the  development  of 
more  extensive  wharfage  to  await  the  demand  of  commerce. 

In  the  meantime  the  Federal  Government  will  have  ex- 
tended its  main  channel  as  far  as  the  entrance  to  the  basin,  and 
the  City  will  need  to  provide  a  spoil  area  for  this  dredging,  con- 
sisting of  marsh  land  upon  which  to  deposit  the  soil  dredged 
from  the  channel.  This  will  require  an  outlay  of  aj^proxiniately 
$107,160  and  make  the  total  expense  to  the  city,  $678,432. 

The  results  will  be  remarkable.  A  densely  populated  dis- 
trict with  active  business  and  building  operations  will  then  re- 
ceive supplies  at  its  door  by  water  instead  of  having  to  truck 
them  for  miles  from  the  East  River  waterfront,  as  is  the  pres- 
ent method.  This  will  mean  commerce  of  about  1,350,000  tons 
annually,  which  at  a  saving  of  30  cents  per  ton  over  ])resent 
methods  of  transportation,  means  an  annual  saving  of  $405,000.* 

The  City  land  reclaimed  by  the  dredging  of  the  main 
channel,  at  Federal  expense,  will  amount  to  approximately 
290  acres,  worth  at  least  $5,000  per  acre,  or  a  total  value  of 
$1,450,000,  with  a  probable  ultimate  value  of  at  least  four  times 
this  amount.  The  excavation  of  the  basin  will  reclaim  130 
acres  along  its  margin  directly  upon  navigable  water.  At  a 
valuation  of  $20,000  per  acre,  or  one  half  the  average  value  of 
lands  along  the  Gowanus  Canal,  this  will  aggregate  $2,600,000. 

The  second  stage  of  the  work  will  cost  the  City  $678,432, 
will  give  it  new  land  worth  $4,050,000  (see  map  on  opposite 
page),  and  will  save  to  its  citizens  $405,000  annually. 

This  amounts  to  almost  600%  profit,  plus  a  saving  (virtu- 
ally an  income)  of  60%  per  year ! 

These  results,  while  startling,  are  consequent  on  this  great 
economic  cause:    Brooklyn  and  Queens  constitute  one  geo- 

*  An  idea  of  the  value  of  basin  tonnage  may  be  f,'aine(l  from  the  fact  that  traffic  on  Newtown  Creek 
(virtually  a  basin)  increased  in  eight  years  from  '■2,G7.5,()"2,5  tons  to  5,990,266  tons,  at  which  point  it  exceeded 
the  entire  tonnage  of  the  Mississippi  River  from  New  Orleans  to  St.  Paul, 

(K) 


T      H      E         B      A      L      A      X      ('      E         S      H      E      E  T 


graphical  unit  of  nearly  2,200,000  population,  whose  growth  is 
the  growth  of  New  York's  five  millions.  This  territory  has  two 
sides,  two  waterfronts,  and  uses  only  one.  It  is  starving  for 
the  want  of  the  other. 


61 


THE      PROBLEM      OF     GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Brooklyn  and  Queens  must  grow  farther  and  farther  from 
the  East  River.  The  greater  they  become,  the  greater  demand 
do  they  make  on  this  waterfront,  their  sole  present  source  of 
supply;  the  less  able  does  it  become  to  serve  them,  both  on 
account  of  its  remoteness,  and  its  congestion;  difficulties 
which  increase  in  compound  ratio.  Brooklyn  and  Queens  are 
growing  away  from  a  totally  inadequate  base  towards  an  ade- 
quate one  that  nature  has  prepared  for  their  use.  The  plan 
here  proposed  is  that  this  latter  base  be  used.  That  is  the 
economic  reason  for  the  success  of  the  project.  It  has  only  capi- 
talized a  portion  of  the  cost  of  ''carrying  coals  to  Newcastle." 

At  the  completion  of  the  second  stage  the  City  will  have 
spent  1914,932  of  the  funds  now  in  hand.  It  will  have  received, 
not  including  increased  taxes  from  increased  values,  or  any  of 
the  incidental  benefits  from  the  establishment  of  new  industries, 
etc.,  new  land  worth  at  once  almost  $5,000,000  (and  ulti- 
mately many  times  this  amount)  and  it  will  have  saved  its 
citizens  more  than  $645,000  annually. 

The  necessary  funds  are  now  in  hand;  they  are  already 
appropriated  and  can  be  spent  for  nothing  else.  The  foregoing 
plan  does  not  mean  complete  development.  This  will  come  in 
time  and  will  pay  for  itself  many -fold  as  it  is  carried  out.  It 
does  mean,  however,  that  vessels  of  all  kinds  up  to  18-foot 
draft  can  penetrate  for  miles  into  the  heart  of  Brooklyn  at  two 
separate  points  contiguous  to  highly  improved  property. 

It  means  far  more  than  this.  Greater  New  York  will  have 
been  given  another  waterfront.  The  first  step  will  have  been 
taken  towards  relieving  New  York  Harbor  of  the  demands 
made  upon  it  by  light  draft  shipping — New  York  Harbor  is  not 
crowded  with  Imperators;  it  is  crowded  with  barges,  coasters 
and  cargo  steamers.  The  first  step  here  proposed  makes  a 
place  for  such  craft.  It  makes  a  place  for  the  industrial  estab- 
lishments that  need  their  cargoes,  and  it  makes  a  place  for  the 
homes  of  the  people  who  work  in  those  establishments.  In 
short,  it  begins  the  correct  solution  of  the  three-fold  problem 
of  Greater  New  York. 

The  continuation  of  the  improvement  suggests  itself.  As 
business  increases  the  other  basins  already  surveyed  will  be 
dredged  by  the  City,  more  channel  will  be  dredged  by  the 
National  Government,  and  more  free  land  thus  will  be  made 
for  the  City,  to  be  leased  or  otherwise  used  to  advantage.  No 


62 


THE         BALANCE  SHEET 


manufacturer  would  need  be  turned  away  or  sent  to  a  twelfth 
stor}^  loft  three  miles  from  the  dock.  He  could  be  accommo- 
dated on  New  York's  industrial  harbor  cheaper  than  at  any 
other  point  in  the  country,  and  at  a  profit  to  the  City  of  New 
York.  New  York's  present  harbor,  relieved  of  the  burden  of 
its  light  draft  shipping,  would  have  abundant  space  for  its 
leviathans  for  years  to  come. 

The  18-foot  main  channels  in  Jamaica  Bay  will  be  found 
inadequate  in  course  of  time.  They  then  may  be  easily  deepened 
to  25  feet,  or  to  30  feet,  and,  in  years  to  come,  to  35  feet. 
Piers  can  be  built  and  large  ships  accommodated  there.  There 
is  nothing  to  prevent  this.  When  piers  are  needed,  they  can 
be  built  here,  built  cheaply  and  at  a  profit. 

The  Harbor  of  New  York  can  grow  in  Jamaica  Bay  for 
generations  to  come,  as  it  can  grow  nowhere  else.  Let  it  de- 
velop upon  a  comprehensive  plan,  so  that  when  it  arrives  at 
maturity  it  will  not  be  the  product  of  chance,  nor  a  marvel  of 
inconvenience,  but  the  reverse — a  place  designed  to  do  business 
in.  Given  this  opportunity  Jamaica  Bay  will  not  only  relieve 
New  York's  business  situation,  but  it  will  stimulate  New  York's 
business  as  it  has  not  been  stimulated  since  Governor  Clinton 
opened  the  Erie  Canal. 

It  will  pay  its  own  way  in  direct  returns  to  the  City  Govern- 
ment, and  to  the  citizens  of  Greater  New  York  it  will  bring  the 
world's  business  of  the  future. 

The  Federal  Government  is  now  pledged  to  carry  the 
main  channel  to  Cornell  Basin  at  its  own  expense.  When  this 
channel  shall  have  been  completed,  Jamaica  Bay  will  have  over 
eight  miles  of  main  channel,  500  feet  wide  and  18  feet  deep,  and 
by  this  time  the  City  will  have  opened  basins,  aggregating 
eleven  miles  in  length,  which  will  pierce  Brooklyn  and  Queens 
in  various  directions,  bringing  the  advantages  of  deep  water 
well  into  the  heart  of  the  City  in  seven  districts. 

Up  to  this  point  the  wharfage  referred  to  has  consisted  of 
platforms  upon  the  basins.  The  ultimate  development  of 
Jamaica  Bay  will  also  include  piers. 

It  will  be  recalled  that  the  fill  from  the  main  channel  ex- 
cavation is  to  be  deposited  behind  a  bulkhead  at  a  distance  of 
1,000  feet  from  the  edge  of  the  channel.  The  intervening  space 
is  left  for  the  construction  of  piers  and  slips.  There  will  be  no 
immediate  necessity  for  the  construction  of  these  piers  because 


63 


T  II  K     P  II  ()  li  L  E  M      0  F      (i  R  E  A  T  E  R      X  E  W  YORK 


TWO  SCENES  IX  BUSY  "  BROWXSVILLE  ' 

1.  Sutter  Avenue  and  Junius  Street,  only  eight  blocks  from  proposed  Fresh  Creek 
Basin,  and  more  than  three  and  one-half  miles  from  the  nearest  frontage  on  tide-water 
at  present  navigaljle. 

2.  Extensive  building  operations  four  and  one-half  blocks  from  proposed  Fresh 
Creek  Basin  and  characteristic  of  «>ntire  Brownsville  district.  Materials  must  now  be 
trucked  four  miles  from  nearest  developed  waterfront. 


64 


THE        BALANCE  SHEET 


iiiiiiiiirflr^-if  Til 

1 

THE  CITY  IMPINGING  UPON  THE  BAY 


1.  Easily  reclaimable  waste  land,  and  houses  crowding  down  to  the  water's  edge. 

2.  Public  School  No.  109,  six  blocks  from  Fresh  Creek. 

3.  Head  of  Fresh  Creek  (to  the  right j  and  the  closelj'  adjacent  city.  Careful  in- 
spection shows  solid  blocks  of  buildings  partially  obscured  by  the  railroad  embankment. 
The  use  of  funds,  now  available,  u-ill  bring  cargo  steamers  to  this  point.  This  picture 
was  taken  from  the  track  of  the  Pennsylvania-New  Haven  Connecting  Railroad. 


65 


THE     PROBLEM      OF     GREATER      NEW  YORK 


the  many  thousand  feet  of  new  wharfage  available  upon  the 
basins  will  serve  an  extensive  commerce.  But  when  the  time 
does  come,  the  favorable  conditions  surrounding  the  construc- 
tion of  the  piers  and  the  dredging  of  the  slips  assure  the  City  a 
handsome  profit  upon  the  investment. 

Either  before  or  during  such  development,  an  increase  in 
the  depth  of  water  in  the  main  channel  will  be  under  way;  again 
make  the  City  the  beneficiary  of  the  Federal  Government  by 
placing  at  New  York's  disposal  millions  of  yards  of  additional 
excavated  material  to  be  used  as  it  may  deem  wise.  While  it 
cannot  be  foretold  w^ith  certainty,  it  now  seems  probable  that 
the  City  should  extend  inland  the  strip  of  City  owned  land 
along  the  waterfront  thus  reclaiming  more  low  grade  land  and 
increasing  the  area  of  City  owned  industrial  property.  A  saga- 
cious and  proficient  handling  of  this  spoil  disposal  should  reap 
for  the  City  an  incalculable  profit,  as  by  that  time  development 
in  this  district  will  have  increased  land  values  to  a  large  degree. 

The  time  is  sure  to  come,  although  in  the  distant  future, 
when  the  channels,  piers,  and  basins  will  be  completely  devel- 
oped entirely  around  the  shore  of  the  Bay.  This,  however,  is 
no  part  of  the  present  project,  and  as  has  been  pointed  out  in 
the  preceding  chapter,  no  reasonable  person  could  propose  such 
an  extravagant  procedure.  When  the  development  does  come 
it  will  be  in  response  to  expanding  needs,  and  it  will  pay  its 
own  way  as  it  develops. 

Besides  the  foregoing  sources  of  municipal  profit,  there  are 
thousands  of  acres  of  privately  owned  marsh  land  about  the 
Bay  whose  reclamation  will  be  greatly  stimulated  by  the  harbor 
development.  These  have  an  average  assessed  valuation  of 
less  than  11,000  per  acre.  Their  reclamation  will  increase  the 
assessment  at  least  ten-fold,*  thus  adding  enormously  to  the 
tax  income  of  the  City. 

Nothing  need  be  said  here  about  those  much  larger  indi- 
rect returns  which  will  pay  New  York  millions  of  dollars  a  year 
through  increased  tax  income  because  of  increased  values  in  the 
entire  district  with  its  ninety-three  square  miles.  These  are 
part  of  the  considerations  in  every  wise  municipal  improvement, 
and  they  will  react  beneficially  upon  the  tax-rate  and  upon  all 
the  property  throughout  the  Greater  City. 

*  The  reclamation  of  one  piece  of  land  adjoining  Mill  Basin  increased  its  assessed  valuation  15H 
times  between  1906  and  1911,  and  an  adjoining  piece  was  increased  2'2  times  during  the  same  period. 


66 


THE      FUTURE      AND      THE  PRESENT 


(PART  THREE  —  THE  PROGRAM) 

CHAPTER  IX 

The  Future  in  the  Hands  of  the  Present 

That  New  York  is  indifferent  is  a  matter  of  comment  in  other 
seaports,  where  achievement  follows  upon  achievement, 
while  New  York  sleeps. — New  York  State  Commerce  Com- 
mission. 

A WELL-DEFINED  proposition  waits  for  action. 
The  National,  State  and  City  Governments  have 
individually  approved  this  solution  of  New^  Y^ork's 
great  problem.  Each  has  given  to  the  development 
its  independent  consideration;  each  has  taken  official  action  ex- 
tending unqualified  endorsement  backed  by  legislative  enact- 
ment. Plans  have  been  completed  by  able  engineers.  For  years 
the  money  has  been  in  the  City  treasury,  duly  appropriated  for 
this  purpose,  and  unavailable  for  any  other.    Eight  thousand 

feet  of  channel  have  actually  been  dredged.    And  then  

The  vast  inertia  of  a  ponderous  organism  has  settled 
quietly  into  inaction. 

While  giant  liners  cause  havoc*  in  an  overcrowded  harbor; 
while  rival  seaports  comment  with  satisfaction  upon  New  Y'ork's 
inability  to  handle  its  commerce;  while  the  Dock  Department 
is  forced  to  deny  valuable  applications  for  wharfage;  w^hile 
congestion  is  repelling  wealth-producing  industries,  and  while 
the  people  of  the  five  boroughs  are  taxed  by  unnatural  condi- 
tions— the  foremost  measure  for  removing  these  civic  disabili- 
ties is  at  a  standstill. 

It  seems  almost  incredible  that  the  interests  of  five  and  one- 
third  million  people,  backed  by  the  commercial  needs  of  a 
nation,  can  be  so  long  disregarded  when  relief  is  simple  and  near 
at  hand.  One  cannot  avoid  contrasting  this  delay  with  the 
vigorous  methods  by  which  foreign  ports  are  seizing  opportuni- 
ties when  they  present  themselves — and  are  creating  them 
when  they  do  not  exist.  Even  other  American  ports  seem  able 
to  rise  to  heights  of  efficiency  when  dealing  with  vital  interests. 

New  Y  ork  is  facing  commercial  and  industrial  opportunities 
such  as  have  never  been  offered  to  any  other  city;  it  needs  an 
awakened  public  consciousness  that  will  force  action. 

*  See  daily  papers  of  May  2-2  and  '26,  1914. 


67 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


New  York  to-day  presents  an  extraordinary  spectacle;  its 
greatest  dormant  asset  is  neglected;  a  length  of  new  channel 
"beginning  nowhere  and  ending  nowhere"  lies  under  the  water; 
one  hundred  and  twelve  acres  of  City  owned  real  estate  stand 
useless;  thousands  of  acres  of  low-priced  industrial  sites  that 
would  serve  to  restore  to  New  York  its  former  lines  of  manu- 
facture are  desolate,  and  meanwhile  the  old,  familiar  three-fold 
problem  of  commerce — industry — congestion — grows  daily  more 
burdensome  to  the  world's  second  city. 

It  is  the  figure  of  a  hand  filled  by  the  gifts  of  fortune  with 
coveted  riches,  neglecting  to  close  its  fingers.  It  is  a  spectacle 
worthy  of  the  attention  of  civic  psychologists;  it  would  be  a 
case  for  civic  alienists,  if  such  might  be. 

We  have  been  dealing  with  present-day  facts — now  look 
for  a  moment  into  the  future.  It  is  this  ability  to  look  into  the 
future  and  to  provide  wisely  for  it  that  forms  the  foundation  of 
every  business;  it  constitutes  the  success  of  the  business  man; 
it  is  the  searchlight  upon  the  road  ahead.  It  was  this  foresight 
that  developed  the  West  by  pushing  railroads  into  the  wilder- 
ness; and  it  was  this  foresight  that  created  the  Panama  Canal. 

It  was  this  foresight  that  gave  New  York  its  location ;  that 
brought  it  to  its  present  world-commanding  position;  and  it 
is  a  lack  of  exactly  this  foresight  that  is  to-da}^  costing  the  great 
City  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  through  failure  to  recognize 
at  its  door  a  simple,  easy  solution  to  its  burdensome  problems. 

We  stand  at  the  threshold  of  a  new  era,  the  possibilities  of 
which  are  unbounded.  History  records  instances  of  monarchs 
having  created  cities  at  a  stroke,  but  there  is  no  record  of  a 
huge  community  of  New  York's  intense  vitality  having  enjoyed 
the  opportunity  of  creating  a  vast  harbor  and  an  industrial 
development  of  such  staggering  proportions  as  that  which 
awaits  in  Jamaica  Bay. 

Here  may  the  channel,  basins,  piers,  bulkheads,  factories, 
warehouses,  residences,  streets,  railroad  terminals  and  trans- 
portation lines  all  be  co-ordinated  at  will  into  one  great  organism 
of  epoch-making  efficiency. 

This  problem  and  its  solution,  which  will  contribute  more 
materially  than  any  other  factor  to  give  Greater  New  York  its 
second  five  million  people,  must  engage  the  profound  thought  of 
the  City's  wisest  minds.  Never  has  American  genius  been 
confronted  by  a  task  more  worthy  of  its  powers. 


68 


THE  GREATER  PORT 

OF 

GREATER  NEW  YORK 


By  Elmer  L.  Corthell,  Dr.  Sc. 
Civil  and  Consulting  Engineer 


A  Supplementary  Chapter  written  especially  for 
this  book  by  one  of  the  foremost  harbor 
engineers  of  the  world. 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Elmer  Lawrence  Gorthell 

Civil  Engineer;  Phillips  Exeter  (N.  H.)  Academy,  graduated  1858;  in 
Civil  War;  returned  to  Brown  University,  1865,  graduated  A.B.  (Phi  Beta 
Kappa),  1867,  A.M.,  1868,  honorary  Sc.D.,  1894;  division  engineer  in  loca- 
tion and  construction  Hannibal  &  Central  Missouri  R.R.,  1869;  chief  assist- 
ant engineer  in  construction  of  bridge  over  Mississippi  at  Hannibal,  Mo., 
1870-1871;  chief  engineer  Sny  Island  Levee,  on  east  bank  of  Mississippi 
River  in  Illinois,  1871-1874;  chief  engineer  of  construction  of  bridge  over 
Mississippi  River  at  Louisiana,  Mo.,  for  Chicago  &  Alton  R.R.,  1873-1874;  in 
charge  for  Capt.  James  B.  Eads  of  engineering  and  construction  of  jetties 
at  mouth  of  Mississippi,  1875-1879;  associated  with  Capt.  Eads  in  surveys 
for  the  ship  railway;  Isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  1880-1881;  chief  engineer  in 
construction  of  N.  Y.,  West  Shore  &  Buffalo  R.R.  and  N.  Y.,  Ont.  &  West- 
ern R.R.,  and  their  terminals  at  New  York  City,  1881-1884;  engineer  build- 
ing steel  railway  bridges  over  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Ohio  and  other  rivers, 
1887-1889;  chief  engineer  of  jetties  at  mouth  of  Brazos  River,  Texas;  in 
building  Merchants  Bridge  over  Mississippi  River  at  St.  Louis,  and  con- 
sulting engineer  of  waterways,  railways,  etc.,  until  1894.  1900-1902  was  con- 
sulting engineer  for  national  public  works  for  the  Argentine  Government; 
appointed  Feb.,  1904,  by  Governor  of  New  York  State,  and  some  years 
member  Advisory  Board  of  Consulting  Engineers  to  build  barge  canals  of 
state;  consulting  engineer  Cape  Cod  Ship  Canal;  Advisory  Board  Trans- 
Alaska  Siberian  R.R.,  now  director  of  Company;  chief  engineer  in  charge 
of  construction  of  modern  port  at  Para,  Brazil,  mouth  of  Amazon,  and  chief 
engineer  constructing  port  at  Rio  Grande  do  Sul,  Brazil.  Chairman  Com- 
mittee, International  Engineering  Congress,  Chicago,  1893;  United  States 
delegate  and  Vice  President  to  International  Navigation  Congress,  Brus- 
sels, 1898;  delegate  of  Argentine  Government  to  International  Navigation 
Congress,  Dusseldorf,  1902;  United  States  Government  member  Permanent 
Committee  of  International  Navigation  Congress.  Life  member  International 
Road  Congress;  member  and  twice  Vice-President  American  Society  of  Civil 
Engineers;  member  and  ex-President  Western  Society  of  Engineers;  member 
Canadian  Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  Institute  of  Civil  Engineers,  Great  Brit- 
ain; Honorary  and  Corresponding  Member  French  Society  of  Civil  Engineers, 
Mexican  Association  of  Civil  Engineers,  Boston  Society  of  Civil  Engineers, 
Fellow  A.A.A.S.,  Royal  Geographical  Society,  London;  honorary  member 
Portuguese  Society  of  Civil  Engineers.  Author:  History  of  Mississippi  Jet- 
ties, 1880;  Report  of  Brussels  Navigation  Congress,  1898;  Maritime  Com- 
merce, Past,  Present  and  Future,  1898;  Some  Ports  of  the  World  (Paris 
Navigation  Congress),  1901;  paper  on  Size  of  Vessels  and  Ports  (Milan  Con- 
gress of  Navigation),  1905;  Report  to  International  Navigation  Congress, 
Philadelphia,  1912;  Maritime  Canals;  also  articles  in  Johnson's  Cyclopedia, 
and  many  technical  papers. — From  ' '  Who 's  Who  in  New  York. ' ' 

(Dr.  Corthell  has  had  responsible  charge  of  work  costing  $180,000,000.) 


70 


THE  GRE      ATER  PORT 


The  Greater  Port  of  Greater  New  York 

By  Elmer  L.  Corthell,  Dr.  Sc.,  Civil  and  Consulting 
Engineer. 

The  writer  of  this  Chapter  desires  to  bring  to  the  Civic  Asso- 
ciations of  Greater  New  York,  which  are  earnestly  striving  to 
influence  towards  harmonious  and  unrestricted  growth  the  Com- 
mercial and  Industrial  elements  that  go  to  make  up  the  prosperity 
of  the  now  one  united  municipality,  facts  that  will  bear  potently 
upon  the  commanding  problems  before  the  public. 

The  writer  has  never  been  professionally  employed  by,  or  con- 
nected with,  the  Municipal  Interests  of  New  York  City,  but  several 
professional  works  on  which  he  has  been  engaged  since  the  year 
1880  have  drawn  his  attention  to  this  the  greatest  port  of  the 
World. 

In  1881-1885,  as  Chief  Engineer  of  the  New  York  West  Shore 
and  Buffalo  Railway,  he  had  charge  of  the  construction  of  the  ter- 
minals at  Weehawken  and  in  Manhattan. 

In  1899  he  made  a  thorough  investigation  of  the  volume  of 
traffic,  maritime,  coastwise  and  interior,  of  the  port  of  Greater 
New  York,  for  his  Report  to  the  International  Congress  of  Navi- 
gation, held  at  Paris  in  1900,  on  the  general  subject  of  the  harbors 
of  the  World.  His  figures  upon  the  Port  of  New  York  became  later, 
in  1906-1909,  the  basis  of  the  predictions  of  the  New  York  City- 
Jamaica  Bay  Commission  and  of  the  U.  S.  Government  Engineers 
upon  the  future  Commerce  of  the  Port  of  Greater  New  York.  In 
1903-1905,  he  was  a  member  of  the  Advisory  Board  of  Consulting 
Engineers  of  the  Barge  Canals  of  New  York  State.  Then  and  later, 
in  1906,  he  urged  upon  the  State  Authorities  the  location  and  con- 
struction of  suitable  and  adequate  harbors  along  the  route  of  the 
Canals  and  of  extensive  terminal  facilities  at  New  York  City  and 
particularly  at  Flushing  and  Jamaica  Bay. 

From  all  of  this  study  he  finds  many  conditions  that  should 
be  considered  at  the  present  moment. 

The  most  important  feature  of  the  situation  and  of  command- 
ing importance,  is  the  extraordinary,  it  may  be  said  phenomenal, 
growth  of  the  City  and  port. 

This  chapter  will  be  read  by  many  who  have  known  the  city 
many  more  years  than  it  has  been  the  writer's  privilege  to  know 
it,  but  he  can  well  remember  how  it  appeared,  when  on  the  steamer 
"Kill  van  Kull",  he  with  the  troops  of  which  he  was  then  a  private, 
sailed  from  Providence,  R.  I.,  one  day  in  the  early  part  of  June, 
1861,  bound  for  Perth  Amboy,  N.  J.,  en-route  for  Washington  via 
the  Camden  and  Amboy  railroad,  passing  around  New  York  City 
via  the  Sound,  East  River,  the  upper  Bay  and  the  channels  through 
the  Jersey  marshes,  the  city  in  view  as  now  viewed  daily  by  the 
passengers  on  the  Colonial  Express  as  it  passes  around  the  southern 
end  of  the  city  on  the  steamer  "Maryland." 


71 


THE     PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


The  younger  generation  who  read  this  chapter  can  hardly 
appreciate  the  changes  which  fifty-three  years  have  wrought  in 
the  population,  commerce,  industry  and  the  general  metropolitan 
character  of  now  Greater  New  York. 

In  the  half  century  previous  to  1850,  the  population  had  in- 
creased from  80,000  to  696,000.  At  the  time  of  the  writer's  first 
visit,  referred  to  above,  it  was  1,170,000,  and  since  then,  by  the 
writer's  own  figures  presented  to  the  American  Association  for  the 
Advancement  of  Science  at  Washington,  D.  C,  January,  1903,  in 
a  paper  entitled  "Population  of  Great  Cities,  Growth  and  Den- 
sity" and  now  extended  to  cover  the  period  since  1903,  the  mag- 
nitude has  assumed  extraordinary  proportions. 

The  Metropolitan  District  is  still  the  metropolis  of  the  New 
World,  and  an  extract  from  that  Report  of  the  writer  covering  the 
following  cities.  Greater  London,  Greater  New  York,  Greater  Paris, 
Greater  Berlin,  Greater  Chicago,  Philadelphia,  St.  Petersburg  and 
Vienna,  all  cities  that  had  over  1,000,000  population  in  1895  when 
the  writer's  first  paper  was  presented  on  this  subject,  will  be  of 
interest  at  the  present  time. 

"Greater  New  York."  The  curve  of  growth  of  this  great  city 
of  the  United  States  is  interesting,  first  by  its  comparison  with  its 
neighbor,  Philadelphia.  The  curves  show  that  they  kept  pace  with 
each  other  very  closely  from  the  year  1700  to  1830,  when,  under 
the  influence  of  the  Erie  Canal,  population  in  New  York  began  to 
grow  with  rapid  strides,  and  has  continued  to  do  so  up  to  the 
present  time  (1903),  the  ratio  of  increase  being  greater  than  that 
of  any  other  large  city  in  the  world  except  Chicago.  The  total 
population  (1900)  was  3,833,999.  The  present  ratio  of  increase  per 
decade  is  37  per  cent." 

The  writer,  as  in  the  case  of  the  large  ships  of  the  world,  after 
careful  study  of  the  past  and  considering  the  limitations  of  the  fu- 
ture, has  had  the  courage  to  predict  future  growth  and  he  has  the 
satisfaction  in  both  studies,  ships  and  cities,  to  find  that  his  pre- 
dictions, while  often  considered  extravagant  at  the  moment,  have 
been  confirmed  as  time  goes  on,  in  fact  the  growth  of  ships  has 
gone  beyond  his  predicted  figures,  and  as  to  cities,  the  actual  and 
predicted  have  been  very  close. 

He  therefore  presents  these  for  Greater  New  York  in  this 
chapter,  it  being  noted  that  the  figures  refer  to  the  population 
embraced  in  the  port  area  and  include  a  part  of  the  New  Jersey 
population  that  may  properly  be  considered  a  part  of  the  metro- 
politan population.  Let  us  see  what  population  we  have  to  pro- 
vide facilities  for:  1920,  6,200,000;  1930,  8,100,000;  1940,  10,- 
500,000;  1950,  13,600,000. 

The  largest  city  in  the  world  at  present  time  is  Greater  London. 
Its  population  in  1911  was  7,252,903,  the  writer's  estimate  pub- 
lished in  1895  for  1910,  was  7,490,400,  so  that  he  exceeded  the 
actual  number  somewhat;  his  estimate  for  1920  was  8,516,256.  He 
now  estimates,  from  the  studv  of  all  the  conditions,  the  following: 
1930,  9,783,000;   1940,  11,140^00;   1950,  12,800,000. 


72 


THE  GREATER  PORT 


The  estimate  in  each  case  is  conservative  and  fair,  and  it  shows 
that  in  1950,  Greater  New  York  will  be  the  largest  City  in  the 
World.  The  rate  in  both  cases  is  considered  to  be  less  than  the 
present  rate,  but  still  not  cut  down  excessively,  for  in  each  case, 
there  is  room  for  expansion,  the  greatest  area  for  this  extension  in 
the  case  of  Greater  New  York  being  Brooklyn  and  Queens. 

This  being  the  population  for  which  must  be  provided  com- 
mercial and  industrial  room  and  facilities  in  the  next  generation 
period,  it  behooves  all  municipal  interests  to  combine  their  efforts 
and  thought  upon  how  to  meet  the  extraordinary  conditions  that 
are  before  them  from  now  on. 

One  of  the  first  questions  to  ask  is,  where  the  population  is 
Hkely  to  find  its  location.    This  is  largely  determined  by  physical 
conditions  and  accessibility  to  water.    A  city  growing  as  this  is 
growing  and  will  grow  must  have  room.    It  is  like  the  congested 
areas  of  population  of  some  countries,  they  have  no  room  in  their 
immediate  areas  so  must  seek  even  distant  continents  for  their 
increasing  populations  to  provide  room  for  them  and  their  commerce. 
Applying  the  same  motives  to  New  York,  what  do  we  find.^ 
First,  as  to  areas  for  occupation  and  expansion:* 
Manhattan  Island  has  an  area  of  13,226  acres; 
The  Bronx  26,522.8  acres; 

Richmond  36,600  acres; 

Brooklyn  and  Queens  120,697.8  acres; 

and  the  percentages  of  the  total  area  of  Greater  New  York — 197,- 
046.6  acres,  are  as  follows: 

Manhattan   6.8% 

The  Bronx   13.4% 

Richmond   18.6% 

Brooklyn  and  Queens   61 . 2% 

The  following  diagram  will  present  these  facts  to  the  eye  more 
clearly  than  is  possible  })y  figures. 


RICHMOND 


BROOKLYN 
&.  QUEENS 


Areas  of  the  several 
boroughs  of 

NEW  YORK  CITY 


NANHATTAN 

AREA.  tN  ACRES 
13,2X6.0 

%  OF  WHOLE 

6.8% 

BROOKLYN  &, 
QUEENS 

120,697.6 

612% 

BRONX 

26,522.6 

13^% 

RICHMOND 

36,600.0 

lfi.6% 

TOTAJL 

ACREAGE 

197,046.6 

100% 

*  Compare  with  note  on  page  11.  There  is  some  discrepancy  between  the  several  methods  of 
computing  the  City's  area. 


73 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


These  figures  and  this  diagram  show  by  comparison  of  areas 
that  the  population  would  likely  go  to  the  area  nearest  to  Man- 
hattan, and  to  the  largest,  the  accessibility  being  equal;  and  this 
is  what  is  happening. 

The  building  of  the  four  bridges  over  the  East  River  to  Brook- 
lyn and  Queens  and  the  subways  and  now  the  new  subways,  and 
in  the  near  future  the  New  York  Connecting  Railroad  for  freight 
purposes,  and  in  the  not  distant  future  the  New  Jersey-Brooklyn 
freight  tunnels  under  the  Narrows  (all  to  this  greatest  area  of  the 
diagram)  are  producing  an  exodus  from  Manhattan's  congested 
area  to  those  larger  areas.  The  exodus  includes  both  population 
and  industries. 

It  may  be  well  to  examine  the  statistics  to  ascertain  what  has 
taken  place  even  with  past  and  present  means  of  transport  and 
from  these  data  to  form  a  reliable  estimate  of  what  the  new  trans- 
portation facilities  will  accomplish. 

An  interesting  diagram  (see  opposite  page)  will  show  that  the 
ratio  of  the  population  movement,  as  between  the  Manhattan  area 
and  the  area  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens,  is  quite  uniform  between 
1830  and  1910,  a  steady  increase  in  the  latter's  ratio  and  a  steady 
decline  in  the  former's.  The  diagram  shows  that  in  1840  Manhat- 
tan had  80%  of  the  population  of  Greater  New  York,  and  Brooklyn 
and  Queens,  16%;  in  1880,  the  percentage  had  changed  to  60% 
and  30%,  and  in  1910  to  49%  and  40%.  This  ratio  of  increase  of 
population  in  Brooklyn  and  Queens  will  in  the  future  be  acceler- 
ated, because  of  increasing  means  of  transportation  of  persons  and 
goods. 

It  is  not  easy  to  predict  what  the  relations  of  populations  will  be 
in  the  future  as  between  Manhattan  and  the  Brooklyn  and  Queens 
area,  but  taking  into  account  the  coming  transportation  facilities  and 
increasing  accessibility  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens  we  may  reasonably 
expect  over  4,000,000  population  in  the  latter  area  in  1940  and 
3,500,000  in  Manhattan  and  the  rest  of  the  10,500,000  in  the  Bronx 
and  Richmond. 

Further,  in  reference  to  the  population,  it  is  interesting  to  ascer- 
tain where  in  Brooklyn  and  Queens  this  great  and  increasing  pop- 
ulation is  now  found  and  to  be  found  in  the  future. 

As  might  be  expected,  it  is  growing  in  the  direction  of  open, 
unoccupied  areas,  and  there  is  no  physical  obstruction  in  the  way 
of  this  movement,  as  the  ground  is  practically  high  and  level  and 
suitable  for  a  great  population.  As  the  areas  near  East  River  and 
opposite  Manhattan  become  filled  up  and  as  subways  and  street 
railways  advance  eastward,  the  population,  moving  along  lines  of 
least  resistance,  will  go  in  that  direction. 

It  appears  now  to  be  occupying  those  wards  that  are  around 
and  towards  that  great  inland  body  of  shallow  water  connected 
with  the  Lower  Bay  at  Rockaway  Inlet — Jamaica  Bay,  with  its 
water  area  of  over  25  square  miles. 


74 


THE  GREATER  PORT 


P«r  Cent. 


100 


1880   1810    1820  I830  1840  1850    I860  I870   I880  I8SO   l900  1910 


I 


Manhattan 


■ Brooklyn 
QoQueeris 


Bronx 


Ricnmond 


POPULATION  MOVEMENT  IN  GREATER  NEW  YORK 
Manhattan  now  contains  less  than  half  of  the  City's  population 
and  its  proportion  is  annually  decreasing 

There  are  32  wards  in  Brooklyn ;  the  four  wards  around  and 
near  Jamaica  Bay  increased  on  the  average  in  the  10  years — 1900 
to  1910 — about  14%  per  annum,  and  all  the  other  27  wards  23/^%, 
and,  as  might  be  expected,  the  cost  of  building  operations  increased 
in  about  the  same  proportion,  the  total  cost  in  the  one  year  of 
1911,  was  about  $13,000,000  in  these  four  wards. 

Greater  New  York  is  so  great  that  figures  of  ward  populations 
do  not  impress  the  mind  but  if  now  we  select  the  four  wards  on  the 
outskirts  of  Brooklyn  lying  east  and  southeast  in  the  areas  rapidly 
filling  up  around  Jamaica  Bay,  the  26th,  29th,  31st  and  32nd  wards, 
and  compare  the  population  of  this  area  in  1910  and  its  increase  in 
the  decade  1900-1910,  with  some  of  the  growing  cities  of  the  coun- 
try, we  will  get  an  idea  of  the  growth  in  the  outlying  wards  of 
Brooklyn.  The  population  in  1910  was  close  on  to  300,000,  the 
increase  in  the  preceding  decade  152%.  Jersey  City  in  1910  had 
a  population  of  270,000  and  an  increase  of  35%  per  decade. 
Kansas  City  .  .  .250,000  and  an  increase  of  51% 
Providence  .  .  .  .225,000  and  an  increase  of  26% 

Louisville  220,000  and  an  increase  of  20% 

Rochester  215,000  and  an  increase  of  35% 

Denver  210,000  and  an  increase  of  52% 

Atlanta  160,000  and  an  increase  of  70% 

There  has  already  been  given  the  land  area  of  Manhattan, 
13,000  acres.  The  area  of  Brooklyn  is  40,000  acres.  The  conges- 
tion of  population  in  Manhattan  had  raised  in  1910  the  assessed 
valuation  to  $222,562  per  acre,  while  that  of  Brooklyn  is  only 
$13,000,  and  this  leads  us  directly  to  the  question  of  the  effect  of 
land  values  upon  industries,  and  the  importance  of  relieving  them 
from  the  excessive  burden  now  borne  by  transferring  them  to  the 
cheaper  lands  of  Brooklyn  and  Queens  instead  of  sending  them  to 
distant  cities  where  more  room  and  cheaper  land  is  to  be  found. 


75 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


The  Commerce  of  the  Port  of  Greater  New  York,  including, 
of  course,  that  of  the  New  Jersey  part  of  the  bay  and  North  River 
in  1899,  by  careful  investigation  made  by  the  writer  for  his  report 
to  the  International  Navigation  Congress  at  Paris,  was  79,544,000 
tons,  subdivided  as  follows:  Coastwise,  39,250,000  tons;  Interior, 
25,093,000  tons;  and  foreign,  15,201,000  tons. 

In  1908,  the  foreign  tonnage  was  24,094,744.  This  shows  an 
increase  in  the  nine  years  of  somewhat  less  than  5%  per  annum. 
No  doubt  the  Coastwise  and  Interior  tonnage  increased  in  equal 
ratio.  This  would  make  the  total  tonnage  in  1913,  approximately 
144,000,000  tons,  subdivided  as  follows: 

Foreign  entrances  and  clearances  .  .  .29,000,000  tons 

Interior  45,000,000  tons 

Coastwise  20,000,000  tons 

There  is  nothing  approaching  this  anywhere  in  the  world. 

The  completion  of  the  two  great  canals,  Panama  and  the 
Barge  Canals  of  New  York  State,  will  increase  rather  than  diminish 
the  annual  ratio  of  increase. 

Where  and  how  will  it  be  accommodated.'^  This  is  a  question 
of  vital  importance  to  the  Port  of  New  York  and  to  Greater  New 
York  itself.  It  is  useless  to  shut  our  eyes  to  the  facts.  The  water 
fronts  of  New  Jersey,  Manhattan  and  the  East  River  front  of 
Brooklyn  are  already  occupied  and  generally  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  preclude  acquiring  much  more  room.  It  is  not  necessary  to  en- 
large upon  this  subject;  it  is  too  patent  to  require  discussion. 

The  writer  is  not  filling  up  this  chapter  with  quotations  which 
are  already  in  print,  but  there  is  one  paragraph  in  the  Report  of 
Col.  (now  General)  John  G.  D.  Knight,  Corps  of  U.  S.  Engineers, 
that  is  quite  pertinent. 

This  report  was  made  in  1907. 

"We  can  say  that  this  tonnage  (of  the  Port  of  New  York) 
will  greatly  increase  and  that  it  is  thought  that  in  ten  years  (seven 
of  which  are  already  passed)  available  water  fronts  for  wharfage 
around  Manhattan  and  in  Upper  New  York  Bay  will  be  exhausted. 
Provision  for  additional  frontage  must  be  made,  which  provision 
should  be  on  New  York  Bay,  if  practicable,  and  Jamaica  Bay 
affords  the  only  site  for  such  addition." 

The  writer,  from  many  years  of  study  of  the  subject,  confirms 
this  opinion,  and  there  can  be  no  other  conclusion  from  the  facts 
already  brought  forward. 

The  additional  water  front  is  no  longer  to  be  found  on  Man- 
hattan Island.  The  water  fronts  developed  in  Manhattan  by  the 
Report  of  the  New  Jersey  Commission  dated  February,  1914,  is 
72.58  miles  long,  Brooklyn  80.94  miles,  Queens  37.06;  length  of 
water  front  measured  around  piers  and  shore  line  in  Manhattan, 
89  miles,  that  is  remaining  16.42  miles  only;  Brooklyn  135  miles, 
remaining  54.06  miles;  Queens  215  miles,  remaining  117.94  miles; 
and  this  does  not  include  Jamaica  Bay,  which  by  the  plans  made 
for  its  improvement,  contains  100  miles  of  bulkhead,  saying  noth- 
ing of  piers,  slips  and  subsidiary  channels. 


76 


THE  GREATER  PORT 


The  area  and  the  frontage  of  Jamaica  Bay  would  take  in,  com- 
fortably, some  of  the  largest  ports  in  the  World,  and  in  any  Euro- 
pean country  would  be  eagerly  occupied  for  commercial  purposes 
when  as  near  to  existing  ports  and  as  accessible  as  this  is  to  New 
York. 

It  is  just  as  important  to  ameliorate  the  industrial  conditions 
as  to  furnish  additional  commercial  facilities.  It  goes  without 
saying  that  if  industries  can  have,  within  a  distance  from  the  New 
Municipal  Building  of  New  York  City  no  greater  than  from  there 
to  Central  Park,  large  tracts  of  cheap  land  on  a  deep  water  front, 
available  to  ocean,  interior  and  coastwise  navigation  and  to  railroad 
facilities,  manufacturers  will  eagerly  seek  such  a  locality. 

The  congestion  of  the  water  front,  and  of  the  streets  leading  to 
itjin  Manhattan,  is  so  notoriously  great  that  it  is  necessary  only  to 
refer  to  it.  This  congestion  has  become  at  certain  hours  or  on 
certain  days  a  veritable  "impasse",  and  every  merchant,  every 
railroad  man  and  every  drayman  and  car  float  man  experiences  the 
difficulties,  annoyances  and  aggravating  delays,  and  the  merchants, 
manufacturers  and  the  general  public  have  to  pay  dearly  for  the 
costly  privilege  of  doing  business  in  Manhattan. 

Briefly,  in  summary  of  the  conditions;  there  is  no  longer  room 
in  Manhattan  for  economical  manufacturing,  transportation  and 
handling  of  goods;  the  conditions  are  growing  worse  daily  and  will 
continue  to  do  so;  these  expensive  and  annoying  conditions  will 
drive  and  already  are  driving,  manufacturers  and  other  businesses 
into  other  cities. 

The  rail,  subway  and  bridge  connections  with  Brooklyn  and 
Queens  open  up  a  clear  outlet  greatly  desired.  The  improvement 
of  the  Inlet  to  Jamaica  Bay  and  of  the  main  channel  undertaken 
by  the  United  States  Government;  the  deed  of  the  State  to  the  City 
of  all  underwater  areas  in  that  vast  inland  basin  of  25  square  miles; 
the  past  appropriations  of  Congress  now  available  and  to  be  ex- 
tended; the  appropriations  of  the  Municipality  of  New  York — all 
these  preparations  assure  the  installation  of  a  great  secondary  port 
to  the  existing  Port  of  New  York,  and  an  integral  part  of  the  Port 
of  Greater  New  York. 

The  writer,  from  many  years  of  study  of  the  subject  and  from 
a  forty  years'  experience  in  harbor  and  port  construction  in  many 
countries  of  the  world,  and  from  examination  of  over  sixty  ports 
and  profound  study  of  the  best  facilities  for  commerce,  is  pro- 
nounced in  his  opinion  that  the  improvement  of  Jamaica  Bay 
should  be  undertaken  in  earnest  and  without  delay,  and  he  is  of  the 
further  opinion  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  commercial  organization 
in  Greater  New  York  to  use  its  influence  upon  the  authorities, — 
national,  state  and  municipal — to  work  together  for  the  realization 
of  this  important  project  so  auspiciously  begun  and  so  unfortunately 
delayed. 

This  improvement  should  certainly  form  an  essential  part  of 
the  comprehensive  plan  for  the  development  of  the  Port  of  New 
York  proposed  recently  by  the  "Merchants  Association,"  for  it 

77 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


offers  the  "ideal  conditions"  named  by  this  Association,  viz.: 
"Cheap  lands  for  industrial  sites  and  low  rental  charges;  close 
proximity  and  easy  access  to  railroad  and  water  carriage;  reason- 
able proximity  to  labor  market  and  homes  and  easy  access  thereto 
for  cartage;  readily  and  always  obtainable  food  supplies  with 
economic  facilities  for  distribution." 

The  writer  was  quite  intimate  with  the  development  and  legis- 
lation that  led  to  the  establishment  of  the  "Port  of  London  Author- 
ity", and  his  opinion  was  sought  on  some  commercial  questions 
connected  with  it.  He  also  has  knowledge  of  the  recently  organized 
"Port  Directors  of  Boston,"  and  he  is  in  accord  with  the  proposi- 
tion to  establish  "The  Port  of  New  York  Commission,"  but  not 
with  its  limitations  proposed,  but  a  real  "Port  of  Greater  New  York 
Authority,"  like  the  "Port  of  London  Authority"  which  shall  have 
absolute  control  in  reorganizing,  rebuilding,  co-ordinating  and  en- 
larging the  commercial  facilities  of  that  Great  Port,  to  the  immense 
advantage  of  the  World's  Commerce  and  to  the  entire  satisfaction 
of  all  concerned. 


$  z.ooo.oooooo 

1600,000,000 

veoo.o  00,000 
1.400.000,000 

1&00,000,000 

1,000,000,000 
&oo,ooo,ooo 
eoo.ooo.ooo 
400.000,000 
eoo.oooooo 


NEW  YORK 


BOSTON 
PHILADELPHIA 


VALUE  or  IMPORTS  AND  EXPORTS  OF  MERCHANDISE  AT  THE  PORTS  OF 

NEW  YORK.BOSTOri  &  PHILADELPHIA. 


78 


APPENDIX 


Consisting  of  extracts  from  official  documents, 
opinions  of  prominent  authorities,  statis- 
tical tables,  charts  and  diagrams. 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


Appendix 


(Note  1) 

Statement  of  Federal,  State  and  Municipal  Legislation  Estab= 
fishing  a  Harbor  at  Jamaica  Bay,  March  6,  1906 — March  4,  1913, 

and  Other  Data 

The  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  of  the  City 
of  New  York,  authorized  Mayor  McClellan  to  appoint  the 


Jamaica  Bay   Commission   March    6,  1906 

The  Mayor  appointed  the  Jamaica  Bay  Commission  and 
requested  it  to  report  before  December  31,  1906   April    26,  1906 

An  extension  of  six  months  time  was  granted  to  the 
Commission    Oct.      26,  1906 

Congress  directed  the  Secretary  of  War  to  make  a  sur- 
vey of  the  Bay  and  to  co-operate  with  the  City  of  New 
York,  Section  3  of  the  Eiver  and  Harbor  Act  of   March    2,  1907 

Jamaica  Bay  Commission  reported  to  the  Board  of  Esti- 
mate and  Apportionment  and  automatically  went  out  of 
office    May     31,  1907 

Jamaica  Bay  Commission  reappointed  and  directed  to 
confer  with  Secretary  of  War  relative  to  plan  of  improve- 
ments for  Jamaica  Bay   June      7,  1907 

Eeport  of  Col.  John  G.  D.  Knight,  Corps  of  Engineers, 
on  Preliminary  Survey  of  Jamaica  Bay,  recommended  addi- 
tional examination  and  survey   Aug.       3,  1907 

Eecommendation  of  Col.  Knight  having  been  approved 
by  the  Board  of  Engineers  for  Eivers  and  Harbors  and  by 
Brig.-Gen.  Mackenzie,  Chief  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  A.,  the 
Acting  Secretary  of  War,  Eobert  Shaw  Oliver,  ordered  such 
an  examination  and  survey    Aug.      19,  1907 

Final  Eeport  of  Col.  Knight  approving  the  project  and 
recommending  Federal  co-operation    Jan.      30,  1909 

This  recommendation  having  been  approved  by  the 
Board  of  Engineers  for  Eivers  and  Harbors  and  by  the 
Chief  of  Engineers,  the  Secretary  of  War,  Luke  E.  Wright, 
so  reported  to  Congress    Feb.      26,  1909 

Congress  instructed  the  Secretery  of  War  to  report 
when  he  was  satisfied  that  the  City  of  New  York  was  pre- 
pared to  proceed  with  its  portion  of  the  work — The  Eiver 
and  Harbor  Act  of    March    3,  1909 

The  State  of  New  York  ceded  to  the  City  its  title  to 
Jamaica  Bay  lands  under  water  by  the  enactment  of  the 
Sargent  BiU    May      29,  1909 


The  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  appropri- 
ated on  behalf  of  the  City  $50,000  for  preliminary  expenses    June       3,  1910 


81 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


Congress  appropriated  $250,500  for  the  entrance  channel 
by  the   River  and  Harbor  Act   of   June     25,  1910 

Congress  enacted  a  law  permitting  the  closing  to  navi- 
gation of  the  interior  streams  of  Jamaica  Bay   June     25,  1910 

The  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  appropri- 
ated $950,000    Feb.       9,  1911 

Congress  appropriated  $300,000  for  dredging  the  inte- 
rior channel — River  and  Harbor  Act  of   July     25,  1912 

The  City  contracted  for  the  dredging  of  about  1,800,000 
yards  ($135,000)  from  the  main  channel.  The  Federal  Gov- 
ernment reimbursed  the  City  for  this  expenditure,  as  per 
River  and  Harbor  Act  of  July  25,  1912   Nov.     15,  1912 

Congress  appropriated  $300,000  for  dredging  the  inte- 
rior channel — River  and  Harbor  Act    March    4,  1913 


(Note  2) 

Statement  of  Federal  and  Municipal  Appropriations  and  Ex- 
penditures for  the  Construction  of  the  Harbor  at  Jamaica  Bay, 

October  8,  1913 


June      3,  1910    City    appropriation    for  preliminary 

expenses    $50,000 

Feb.       9,  1911    City  appropriation  for  dredging,  etc..  950,000 
Expended  of  City  appropriation,  for 
engineering    expenses,    real  estate, 

etc   $76,780 

June     25,  1910    Federal    appropriation    for  entrance 

channel    250,500 

July      25,  1912    Federal  appropriation  for  main  inte- 
rior channel    300,000 

March    4,  1913    Federal  appropriation  for  main  inte- 
rior channel    300,000 

Expended    of    Federal  appropriation 

for  entrance  channel    19,780 

for  interior   channel    135,000 


Total  Appropriations    $1,850,500 

Total  Expenditures    $231,560 


Unexpended  City  Appropriation   $923,220 

Unexpended  Federal  Appropriation...  695,720 


Total  Unexpended  Balance   $1,618,940 


(Note  3) 

Extract  from  Majority  Report  of  the  Jamaica  Bay  Improve- 
ment Commission,  December  27,  1909, 

The  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment, 
New  York  City,  New  York. 
Gentlemen: — We  beg  to  submit  herewith  progress  report  of  the  Jamaica 
Bay  Improvement  Commission. 


82 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


The  work  of  the  Commission  has  not  yet  been  completed,  but  enough 
has  been  done  to  enable  them  to  fix  with  precision  the  harbor  lines  on  the 
west  and  north  shores  of  the  bay  which  had  previously  been  tentatively 
approved  by  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  and  by  the  Federal 
Government.  The  Commission  have  likewise  arrived  at  certain  definite 
conclusions  as  to  the  method  of  treatment  of  the  entire  west  and  north 
shores  of  the  bay,  and  are  able  to  suggest  a  definite  line  of  action  upon 
which  the  City  might  proceed.  A  summary  of  the  conclusions  and  recom- 
mendations follow: 

Conclusions 

First — That  the  growth  of  the  Port  of  Xew  York  warrants  and  justifies 
a  substantial  improvement  of  Jamaica  Bay. 

Second — That  any  such  improvement  of  the  bay  should,  however,  be 
carried  on  cautiously  until  the  success  attending  the  Federal  Engineers' 
effort  to  improve  and  maintain  an  entrance  channel  through  Eockaway 
Inlet  is  assured. 

Third — That  the  improvements  suggested  herewith  should  be  carried  on 
at  the  same  time  and  not  before  the  dredging  of  the  Inlet  Channel. 

Fourth — That  the  real  and  substantial  benefit  to  be  derived  during  the 
first  ten  or  fifteen  years  following  the  dredging  of  the  preliminary  inside 
channel  will  result  from  the  means  afforded  of  cheaply  supplying  building 
material  and  supplies  to  the  territory  immediately  adjacent  to  the  bay,  and 
in  this  manner  not  merely  assisting  in,  but  actually  promoting,  its  growth. 

Fifth — That  growth  in  population  thus  stimulated  will  continue  to 
increase  at  a  rate  much  greater  than  the  average,  either  for  the  City  or 
the  Borough  of  Brooklyn. 

Sixth — That  manufacturing  will  increase  in  proportion  to  the  growth 
in  population  and  may  possibly  assist  advances  in  this  direction. 

Eespectfully  submitted, 

PHILIP  P.  FARLEY, 

JOHN  J.  McLaughlin, 

Commissioners. 

(Note  4) 

Extract  from  Minority  Report  of  the  Jamaica  Bay  Improve- 
ment Commission  (Signed  by  William  Q.  Ford),  December  27, 

1909 

The  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment, 

New  York  City,  New  York. 
Gentlemen: — 

Supplementing  the  joint  report  of  this  Commission  transmitted  to  your 
honorable  Board,  May  26,  1909  (which  follows  as  Appendix),  the  writer 
has  the  honor  to  submit  the  following  progress  report  upon  the  improvement 
and  development  of  Jamaica  Bay: 

Synopsis 

New  York  must  make  provision  for  extensive  new  harborage.  Her 
present  harbor  is  nearly  fully  developed  and  will  not  much  longer  afford 
space  for  new  business. 

Jamaica  Bay  is  the  logical  situs  for  the  new  harbor,  on  account  of 
location  and  the  readiness  and  cheapness  with  which  the  construction  may  be 
carried  out. 

Its  borders,  while  land  is  cheap,  should  become  the  property  of  the  City, 
and  the  increment  in  values  due  to  the  development  along  the  border  should 
go  to  her. 

This  land  should  be  acquired  as  soon  as  practicable  and  should  be  held 
as  the  key  to  a  great  railroad  terminal  system  to  be  worked  in  the  highest 
accord  with  the  future  development  of  an  effective  wharfage  equipment  for 
all  kinds  of  sea-going  vessels. 


83 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


A  sufficient  sum  of  money  should  be  appropriated  by  the  City  to 
carry  on  the  work  incident  to  creating  the  preliminary  channel  from  Barren 
Island  to  Cornell's  Creek,  for  which  the  Federal  Government  proposes  to 
reimburse  the  City  at  the  rate  of  eight  cents  per  cubic  yard  as  the  work 
goes  on. 

The  diagonal  pier  system  should  maintain  from  the  beginning,  both  as 
to  the  ''main  land"  and  interior  sections. 

The  interior  of  the  Bay,  already  largely  owned  by  the  City,  should 
afford  a  partial  solution  of  the  enlarged  barge  canal  terminal  problem,  par- 
ticularly for  shipments  breaking  bulk  at  New  York  between  the  Great  Lake 
regions  and  foreign  and  domestic  ports. 

The  recommendation  on  the  part  of  the  War  Department  that  the  Federal 
Government  should  back  the  enterprise  to  the  extent  of  approximately  seven 
and  one-half  million  dollars,  and  the  very  recent  generous  contribution  on 
the  part  of  the  State  of  New  York  of  whatever  title  she  has  to  lands  under 
water  needed  for  the  project  (through  Chapter  568,  Laws  of  1909,  the 
"Sargent  Bill"),  are  additional  incentives  for  the  City  to  begin  at  this 
time  work  of  such  importance  to  the  City,  State  and  Nation. 

The  generosity  of  the  State  should  be  met  by  similar  generosity  by  the 
City,  and  in  the  event  of  the  State  wishing  to  use  part  of  Jamaica  Bay  in 
connection  with  the  new  barge  canal,  the  City  should  co-operate  to  the 
greatest  possible  extent,  placing  at  the  disposal  of  the  State,  if  necessary, 
sufficient  land  to  accommodate  an  up-to-date  and  efficient  terminal. 

During  the  progress  of  the  physical  development  vested  rights  in  Jamaica 
Bay  should  be  fully  safeguarded  and  protected,  and  all  existing  industries 
promoted,  rather  than  retarded,  at  any  rate  until  such  time  as  it  may  be 
necessary  to  supplant  them  by  others  more  important.  That  it  should  be 
the  policy  of  the  City  to  disturb  as  little  as  possible  such  communities  as 
those  about  Old  Mill  Creek  and  similar  districts  until  actually  required, 
or  at  least  until  the  City  shall  have  offered  full  recompense  to  the  land 
and  home  owners. 

The  application  of  the  Canarsie  Oystermen  Association  (see  Exhibit  No. 
4)  for  suitable  facilities  for  the  collection,  storage  and  distribution  of 
oysters  is  in  entire  accord  with  the  spirit  of  Section  825  of  the  City  charter, 
and  should  receive  recognition. 

The  creation  of  the  exterior  channel,  the  entrance  to  the  Bay,  will  be 
a  duty  beyond  the  province  of  the  City  of  New  York.  It  will  become  a  duty 
of  the  War  Department,  and  will  be  executed  by  the  Army  Engineers,  who 
alone  will  be  responsible  for  it. 

The  writer  has  entire  confidence  in  their  ability  to  keep  the  entrance 
open,  and  does  not  feel  that  the  City  of  New  York  need  halt  in  her  develop- 
ment of  the  Bay  simply  through  fear  of  their  inability. 

The  City  should  not  specify  and  set  apart  some  particular  lands  for 
special  benefit  and  consideration,  at  the  expense  of  the  City,  prior  to  their 
acquisition  at  normal  values. 

The  City  should  carry  on  the  general  development,  the  main  channel, 
and  later  develop  especially  some  desirable  district  where  she  may  have 
succeeded  in  acquiring  land  at  reasonably  liberal,  but  not  exorbitant,  ex- 
penditures. 

Specific  recommendations  will  conclude  this  report. 


Summary 

The  following  is  a  short  outline  of  some  of  the  conditions  before  us: 

1.  In  a  comparatively  few  years  the  natural  increase  in  commerce  will 
have  brought  into  demand  all  the  available  waterfront  of  the  present  Port 
of  New  York. 

2.  Before  this  occurs  the  small  supply  of  largely  increased  demand 
will  send  the  prices  of  wharfage  up  beyond  a  reasonable  rate. 

3.  This  will  drive  some  commerce  away  to  ports  which  will  answer 
the  purpose,  but  where  the  charges  are  less. 


84 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


4.  In  the  meantime  some  new  commerce  will  still  come  and  pay  the 
advanced  rates,  until  finally  all  the  room  is  not  only  used  up,  but  some  of 
it  is  doing  double  duty. 

5.  After  that  new  commerce  must  go  elsewhere. 

6.  Competing  ports  will  take  advantage  of  the  situation  and  under  the 
stimulus  of  great  relative  advance  in  commercial  prosperity  will  be  spurred 
on  to  making  their  localities  so  attractive  that  they  will  draw  still  further 
from  New  York  commerce, 

7.  New  York,  having  come  to  a  standstill  while  the  rest  of  the  country 
is  advancing,  will  lose  prestige  and  in  the  course  of  time  suffer  very  seriously 
in  many  ways. 

8.  If,  however,  through  the  forethought  of  the  Federal  and  City  Gov- 
ernments a  place  can  be  secured  which  will  answer  as  a  place  for  overflow 
commerce,  the  situation  will  be  greatly  relieved.  If  at  the  same  time  such 
a  place  should  be  capable  of  large  ultimate  development  upon  broad  and 
progressive  plans,  the  solution  of  the  problem  will  be  well  in  sight,  and 
New  York  need  have  no  fear  of  losing  her  supremacy  for  many  years 
to  come. 

9.  Jamaica  Bay  is  capable  of  adding  to  the  Harbor  of  New  York 
over  one  hundred  and  fifty  (150)  miles  of  wharfage  for  vessels,  as  well 
as  providing  large  areas  for  manufacturing,  warehousing,  storage,  railroad 
truckage,  etc. 

10.  It  will  be  several  hours  nearer  Europe  than  the  present  port. 

11.  It  can  have  less  dangerous  channels, 

12.  It  can  be  made  in  a  large  degree  the  terminus  of  the  new  1,000-ton 
Barge  Canal  when  completed. 

13.  It  can  become  a  center  for  certain  kinds  of  trade  and  manufacture 
without  disturbing  the  interests  of  the  existing  built-up  sections  of  the 
Greater  New  York. 

14.  It  is  already  within  40  minutes  of  downtown  Manhattan,  under 
ordinary  every-day  schedules. 

15.  The  cost  of  construction  will  be  less  than  usual  about  New  York. 

16.  Its  development  will  reclaim  thousands  of  acres  of  low  land,  making 
them  productive  where  they  are  now  of  little  value. 

17.  The  existence  of  a  harbor  in  this  vicinity  will  reduce  the  cost  of 
many  commodities  within  its  immediate  neighborhood. 

18.  It  will,  through  the  decreased  freight  rates,  and  hence  reduced 
ultimate  cost  of  building  materials,  result  in  a  more  rapid  development 
of  the  adjoining  interior. 

19.  It  should  reduce  the  cost  of  living. 

20.  It  should  also  give  active  employment  to  many  people. 

21.  It  can,  by  proper  arrangement  of  railroad  systems  in  advance,  be 
placed  in  direct  touch  with  the  interior  of  the  United  States,  and  there 
would  be  ample  room  for  terminals. 

22.  The  through-freight  rates  between  the  interior  States  and  Jamaica 
Bay  can  most  probably  be  as  low  as  to  any  other  part  of  New  York  City. 

23.  In  some  cases  the  shipments  between  it  and  the  West  can  be  even 
cheaper  than  where  several  haulings  of  goods  are  required,  as  now  in  par- 
ticular sections  of  New  York  City. 

24.  The  development  of  Jamaica  Bay  section  will  provide  a  place  for 
homes  of  very  many  thousands  of  people  within  a  short  radius  from  the 
central  parts  of  New  York  City. 

25.  The  development  of  the  Bay  can  be  made  for  many  millions  of 
dollars  less  for  the  advantages  to  be  gained  than  would  be  required  in  any 
other  available  section  of  equal  size. 

26.  Unless  New  York  takes  up  this  development  of  Jamaica  Bay  act- 
ively, New  Jersey  will  forestall  her  in  the  development  of  the  Newark 
Meadows,  where  several  of  the  great  railroads  already  have  their  termini. 

27.  The  City  of  Newark  proposes  a  vast  development  of  the  meadows 
adjacent  to  her. 

28.  She  has  already  prepared  a  plan  for  a  start,  and  has  appropriated 
$1,000,000  to  get  it  under  way. 


85 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


29.  Commerce  once  gained,  if  accompanied  with  inducements  equal  to 
those  of  other  ports,  generally  stays  through  force  of  habit. 

30.  Commerce  once  lost  is  difficult  to  regain. 

31.  If  New  Jersey  goes  ahead  of  us  she  will  get  for  her  citizens  the 
wealth  and  prosperity  attendant  upon  increased  commerce — which  the  citi- 
zens of  New  York  might  have  had. 


(Note  5) 

Extract  from  Report  of  Colonel  (now  General)  John  G.  D. 
Knight,    to   the    Chief   of    Engineers,    United    States  Army, 

January  30,  1909 

I  therefore  recommend  that  the  dredging  of  the  main  channel  be  re- 
quired of  the  City  of  New  York,  and  that  the  City  be  reimbursed  therefor 
at  the  rate  of  10  cents  per  cubic  yard  place  measurement  for  all  material 
dredged  within  the  limits  of  the  main  channel  to  the  extent  of  $5,900,000 
less  cost  to  the  Government  of  superintendence,  surveying  and  inspecting. 

The  main  channel  commences  at  the  inner  end  of  the  1,500  foot  entrance 
channel,  includes  all  widenings  at  angles,  and  terminates  at  the  mouth  of 
Cornell's  Creek.  Five  million  nine  hundred  thousand  dollars  is  the  estimated 
cost  of  dredging  this  channel  to  a  depth  of  30  feet.  Any  cost  of  dredging 
this  channel  in  excess  of  this  estimate  reduced  by  cost  of  superintendence, 
etc.,  should  be  borne  by  the  City.  The  City  should  not  be  reimbursed  for 
any  material  dredged  from  below  a  depth  of  30  feet  below  mean  low  water, 
as  determined  by  the  United  States  Engineer  Survey  of  1908. 

Summary. — The  plan  of  improvement  of  the  waters  of  Jamaica  Bay, 
including  entrance  to  said  bay  at  Rockaway  Inlet  and  those  waters  having 
their  outlet  in  Dead  Horse  Inlet,  as  recommended,  is  to  provide  ultimately 
an  entrance  channel  1,500  feet  wide  and  30  feet  deep  through  Rockaway 
Inlet  to  a  main  channel  within  the  bay,  which  shall  be  1,000  feet  wide, 
except  where  widened  at  angles,  and  30  feet  deep;  auxiliary  interior  chan- 
nels in  general  direction  as  indicated  above;  and  if  needed  two  stone  jetties 
at  the  mouth  of  the  entrance  channel,  one  extending  from  the  western  end 
of  Rockaway  Beach,  the  other  from  the  eastern  half  of  Manhattan  Beach, 
Coney  Island. 

The  order  recommended  of  such  improvement  is,  first,  to  dredge  the 
entrance  channel  for  a  width  of  500  feet  to  a  depth  of  18  feet,  as  outlined 
above  in  last  paragraph  of  Section  9;  second,  to  maintain  this  channel; 
third,  widen  and  deepen  this  channel  in  proportion  to  the  demands  of 
commerce,  ultimately  to  a  1,500  foot  width  and  30  feet  depth;  fourth,  con- 
struct east  jetty,  when  its  necessity  is  determined;  fifth,  construct  west 
jetty,  as  necessity  is  determined. 

The  proposition  of  the  cost  to  be  borne  by  the  City  of  New  York  which 
is  recommended  is  the  cost  of  dredging  all  auxiliary  interior  channels  and 
basins,  and  any  cost  of  dredging  the  main  channel  in  excess  of  $5,900,000, 
which  sum,  less  expense  to  the  United  States  for  superintendence,  surveying 
and  inspecting,  is  to  be  paid  to  the  City  for  material  actually  dredged  from 
the  main  channel  within  the  prescribed  limits,  it  being  understood  that  the 
City  shall  dredge  the  main  channel  to  the  dimensions  stated  and  shall 
receive  no  other  reimbursement  therefor  from  the  United  States  except 
the  sum  stated. 

It  is  further  recommended  that  Congress  declare  nonnavigable  those 
waters  which  lie  between  the  islands  within  Jamaica  Bay,  but  do  not  lie 
within  the  limits  of  such  waterways  as  may  be  improved  by  the  City  of 
New  York,  on  plans  recommended  by  the  Chief  of  Engineers,  and  authorized 
by  the  Secretary  of  War. 

As  above  outlined,  I  believe  the  waters  of  Jamaica  Bay,  including 
entrance  to  said  bay  at  Rockaway  Inlet,  and  those  waters  having  their 


86 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


outlet  in  Dead  Horse  Inlet,  to  be  worthy  of  improvement  by  the  General 
Government. 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servant, 

JOHN  G.  D.  KNIGHT, 

Colonel,  Corps  of  Engineers. 

The  Chief  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  Army. 


(Note  6) 

Extract  from  Report  of  Board  of  Engineers  for  Rivers  and 
Harbors,   to   the   Chief   of    Engineers,   United   States  Army, 

February  23,  1909 

The  Board  further  recommends  that  the  18-foot  entrance  channel  should 
not  be  dredged  until  the  Secretary  of  War  is  satisfied  that  the  City  of 
New  York  is  prepared  to  undertake  its  part  of  the  general  plan  of  improve- 
ment outlined  above.  The  estimated  cost  of  this  channel  for  first  develop- 
ment of  18  feet  is  $250,500,  and  this  is  the  amount  of  the  first  appropriation 
necessary  under  the  conditions  cited. 

The  ultimate  cost  to  the  United  States  of  the  plan  proposed  for  adop- 
tion will  be  as  follows: 


(a)  Main  channel    $4,720,000 

(b)  Dredging  the  18-foot  entrance  channel   250,500 

(c)  Widening  and  deepening  this  channel   1,016,500 

(d)  East  jetty    724,500 

(e)  West  jetty    589,500 

(f)  Contingencies    129,050 


Total   •   $7,430,050 


The  cost  of  annual  maintenance  of  the  30-foot  entrance  channel  is 
estimated  at  $55,600.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  items  (d)  and  (e)  may  not 
be  necessary. 

For  the  Board: 

D.  W.  LOCKWOOD, 

Colonel,  Corps  of  Engineers, 

Senior  Member  of  Board. 


(Note  7) 

Extract  from  River  and  Harbor  Bill  of  June  25,  191a 

An  Act  making  appropriations  for  the  construction,  repair,  and  preser- 
vation of  certain  public  works  on  rivers  and  harbors,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled.  That  the  following  sums  of  money 
be,  and  are  hereby,  appropriated,  to  be  paid  out  of  any  money  in  the 
Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  to  be  immediately  available,  and  to 
be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  War  and  the  super- 
vision of  the  Chief  of  Engineers,  for  the  construction,  completion,  repair, 
and  preservation  of  the  public  works  hereinafter  named:  

Improving  Jamaica  Bay,  New  York,  and  entrance  thereto  in  accordance 
with  the  report  submitted  in  House  Document  Numbered  Fourteen  hundred 
and  eighty-eight.  Sixtieth  Congress,  second  session,  two  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  Provided,  That  no  part  of  this  amount  shall 
be  expended  until  the  Secretary  of  War  is  satisfied  that  the  City  of  New 
York  is  prepared  to  undertake  its  part  of  the  general  plan  for  the  improve- 
ment of  Jamaica  Bay,  as  outlined  in  the  report  cited  above. 


87 


THE      PROBLEISI      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(Note  8) 

Extract  from  River  and  Harbor  Bill  of  July  25,  1912 

An  Act  making  appropriations  for  the  construction,  repair,  and  preser- 
vation of  certain  public  works  on  rivers  and  harbors,  and  for  other  purpose 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  the  following  sums  of  money 
be,  and  are  hereby,  appropriated,  to  be  paid  out  of  any  money  in  the 
Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  to  be  immediately  available,  and  to 
be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  War  and  the  super- 
vision of  the  Chief  of  Engineers,  for  the  construction,  completion,  repair, 
and  preservation  of  the  public  works  hereinafter  named:  

Improving  Jamaica  Bay,  New  York,  and  entrance  thereto  in  accordance 
with  the  report  submitted  in  House  Document  Numbered  Fourteen  hundred 
and  eighty-eight.  Sixtieth  Congress,  second  session,  three  hundred  thousand 
dollars,  from  which  amount  the  Secretary  of  War  may  reimburse  the  City 
of  New  York  each  month  for  the  dredging  and  the  disposition  of  dredged 
material  of  the  preceding  month  at  the  actual  unit  price  per  cubic  yard, 
place  measurement.  Provided,  That  such  cost  does  not  exceed  eight  cents 
per  cubic  yard. 


(Note  9) 

Extract  from  River  and  Harbor  Bill  of  March  4,  1913 

An  Act  making  appropriations  for  the  construction,  repair,  and  preser- 
vation of  certain  public  works  on  rivers  and  harbors,  and  for  other  purposes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United 
States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled.  That  the  following  sums  of  money 
be,  and  are  hereby,  appropriated,  to  be  paid  out  of  any  money  in  the 
Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  to  be  immediately  available,  and  to 
be  expended  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  War  and  the  super- 
vision of  the  Chief  of  Engineers,  for  the  construction,  completion,  repair, 
and  preservation  of  the  public  works  hereinafter  named:  

Improving  Jamaica  Bay,  New  York:  Continuing  improvement  in  ac- 
cordance with  tlie  report  submitted  in  House  Document  Numbered  Fourteen 
hundred  and  eiglit-eight.  Sixtieth  Congress,  second  session,  three  hundred 
thousand  dollars,  from  which  amount  the  Secretary  of  War  may  reimburse 
the  City  of  New  York  each  mouth  for  the  dredging  and  the  disposition 
of  dredged  material  of  the  preceding  month  at  the  actual  unit  price  per 
cubic  yard,  place  measurement.  Provided,  That  such  cost  shall  not  exceed 
eight  cents  per  cubic  yard. 


(Note  10) 

An  Act  to  Grant  to  the  City  of  New  York  Certain  Lands  Under 
Water  in  Jamaica  Bay  and  Vicinity 

The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  represented  in  Senate  and  Assembly, 
do  enact  as  follows: 

Section  1.  To  the  end  that  the  City  of  New  York  may  co-operate  with 
the  Federal  Government  in  the  creation  of  a  new  harbor  in  and  about 
Jamaica  Bay,  including  the  making  of  channels,  basins,  slips  and  other 
necessary  adjuncts,  through  the  excavation  of  the  soil  or  lands  under  water, 


88 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


and  otherwise,  intended  for  the  advancement  of  the  commercial  interests 
of  the  City,  State  and  Nation,  there  is  hereby  granted  for  the  purposes 
specified  in  this  act,  to  the  City  of  New  York  such  right,  title  and  interest 
as  the  State  of  New  York  may  have  in  and  to  the  land  under  water  in 
Jamaica  Bay  and  Rockaway  Inlet,  and  the  tributaries  thereto  which  lie  to 
the  northward  of  latitude  forty  degrees  thirty-three  minutes  north,  and  to 
the  eastward  of  longitude  seventy-three  degrees  fifty-six  minutes  west,  as 
now  interpreted,  excluding,  however,  all  lands  under  water  included  within 
the  boundary  of  Nassau  County.  This  grant  shall  become  operative  upon 
the  United  States  Government  making  its  first  appropriation  for  the  creation 
of  the  new  harbor  mentioned  in  this  act,  or  upon  the  City  of  New  York 
appropriating  and  setting  aside  a  sum  not  less  than  one  million  dollars 
for  the  same  purpose. 

Sec.  2.  The  grant  shall  not  affect  such  land  as  may  hereafter  be 
granted  by  the  Commissioners  of  the  Land  Ofiice  under  any  application 
made  prior  to  May  twenty-ninth,  nineteen  hundred  and  nine,  but  if  any 
such  application  be  denied,  the  land  covered  thereby  shall  pass  to  the  City 
of  New  York  under  the  conditions  of  this  act. 

Sec.  3.    This  act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 


(Note  11) 

Extract  from  Governor  Hughes'  Message  of  Approval 

State  of  New  York, 

Executive  Chamber, 

Albany,  May  29,  1909. 

Memorandum  filed  with  Assemby  Bill  No.  2354  (Senate  reprint,  No. 
1633),  entitled  * '  An  act  to  grant  to  the  City  of  New  York  certain  lands 
under  water  in  Jamaica  Bay  and  vicinity." 

Approved. 

This  bill  is  designed  to  enable  the  City  of  New  York  to  co-operate  with 
the  Federal  Government  in  the  creation  of  a  new  harbor  in  and  about 
Jamaica  Bay,  including  the  making  of  channels,  basins,  slips,  and  other 
necessary  adjuncts,  and,  as  the  bill  recites,  to  secure  ''the  advancement  of 
the  commercial  interest  of  the  City,  State  and  Nation.''  For  this  purpose 
the  grant  is  made  to  the  City  of  New  York  of  such  right,  title,  and  interest 
as  the  State  of  New  York  may  have  in  and  to  the  land  under  water  in 
Jamaica  Bay  and  Eockaway  Inlet,  and  the  tributaries  thereto,  as  stated. 
The  bill  provides  that  the  grant  ''shall  become  operative  upon  the  United 
States  Government  making  its  first  appropriation  for  the  creation  of  the 
new  harbor  mentioned  in  this  act  or  upon  the  City  of  New  York  appro- 
priating and  setting  aside  a  sum  of  not  less  than  $1,000,000  for  the  same 
purpose. 

It  is  of  manifest  importance  that  provision  be  made  for  the  proper 
protection  of  the  public  interest  in  and  about  the  waters  of  New  York, 
and  that  the  necessary  and  important  developments  of  the  future  should 
not  be  retarded  or  made  more  expensive  to  the  community  by  failure  at  this 
time  to  take  suitable  steps  to  safeguard  the  public  right.  It  may  be 
regretted  that  the  bill  contains  any  exception  to  its  operation.  But  this  is 
not  a  reason  for  its  disapproval,  for  further  delay  will  permit  still  more 
numerous  exceptions  and  detract  from  the  public  opportunity  which  should 
be  provided. 

CHAELES  E.  HUGHES. 


89 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(Note  12) 


Report  of  Chief  of  Engineers,  1913 — Part  II,  Page  1698.  Im= 
provement  of  Jamaica  Bay,  N.  Y. — Operations  During  the  Past 

Fiscal  Year 

The  U.  S.  dredge  Atlantic  began  dredging  in  the  entrance  channel  on 
August  13,  1912,  and  continued  until  December  6,  1912,  when  she  was  with- 
drawn for  other  work.  In  this  period  she  worked  5411^  actual  working 
hours,  at  cost  of  $25  per  working  hour,  removing  180,641  cubic  yards,  mainly 
of  sand,  with  about  20  per  cent  of  shells  and  mud,  the  cost  being  7.49  cents 
per  yard.  On  account  of  shoal  water  the  Atlantic  could  work  in  this  channel 
only  on  rising  tide  or  near  high  water,  and  she  could  not  carry  full  loads. 

The  work  was  confined  to  the  inner  7,000  feet  of  the  entrance  channel 
(about  10,000  feet  long),  where  the  actual  depths  were  from  10  to  18  feet, 
and  the  available  depth  was  13  feet  in  a  narrow  channel.  This  channel 
was  deepened  to  14i/^  feet  available  depth  for  200  feet  width,  with  varying 
depths  either  side. 

On  November  15,  1912,  the  City  of  New  York,  through  the  Department 
of  Docks  and  Ferries,  entered  into  contract  with  the  Atlantic,  Gulf  and 
Pacific  Co.  to  dredge,  to  18  feet  deep  and  500  feet  wide,  a  section  8,000  feet 
long  of  the  main  interior  channel  of  Jamaica  Bay,  at  cost  of  7.49  cents  per 
cubic  yard,  measured  in  the  cut,  the  total  amount  of  excavation  required 
being  estimated  at  about  1,800,000  cubic  yards. 

Under  the  terms  of  the  adopted  project  and  the  special  authority  of 
the  River  and  Harbor  Act  of  1912,  the  City  of  New  York  is  to  be  reimbursed 
by  the  United  States  for  the  cost  of  this  dredging  at  price  not  to  exceed 
eight  cents  per  cubic  yard. 

Under  this  contract  dredging  was  begun  December  4,  1912,  and  up  to 
June  30,  1913,  1,413,400  cubic  yards  of  sand  and  mud  had  been  dredged 
and  dumped  ashore  back  of  the  bulkhead  line,  a  distance  of  1,000  feet  from 
the  dredging.  The  channel  had  been  completed  to  its  full  width  for  6,500 
feet  of  its  length,  and  partly  completed  for  an  additional  1,200  feet.  The 
work  began  first  at  the  north  end,  at  Mill  Creek  Basin;  afterwards  at  the 
south  end,  opposite  the  upper  part  of  Barren  Island;  the  uncompleted  part 
is  nearly  in  the  middle  of  the  8,000  feet. 


It  is  expected  to  resume  work  in  the  entrance  channel  with  the  United 
States  dredges  when  existing  leases  terminate  and  the  dredges  can  be 
spared  from  more  urgent  work. 

The  contract  with  the  City  of  Xew  York  should  be  completed  in  August 
or  September.  It  is  not  known  how  soon  the  City  will  be  ready  to  enter 
into  another  contract  for  extension  of  the  interior  channel.  Certain  dis- 
puted ownership  or  control  of  lands  under  water  are  causing  delay. 

No  additional  funds  are  required  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1915. 


Proposed  Operations 


Appropriations 


June  25,  1910 
July  25,  1912 
March  4,  1913 


$250,500.00 
300,000.00 
300,000.00 


Received  from  sale  of  maps 


59.17 


$850,559.17 


90 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  13) 

Extracts  from  the  Report  of  the  New  York  Harbor  Line  Board 
to  Brig.=Qen.  G.  L.  Gillespie,  Chief  of  Engineers,  Under  Date  of 
December  2,  1903,  In  the  Matter  of  the  Extension  of  the  Pier= 
head  Line  of  Manhattan  Island,  in  the  North  River 

In  order  that  some  idea  may  be  formed  of  the  congestion  along  the 
waterfront  of  Manhattan  Island,  it  may  here  be  stated  that  the  cargoes 
of  all  vessels  must  be  carried  to  and  from  the  vessels  by  trucks.  The  lower 
streets  of  the  City  are  now  nearly  impassable,  due  to  the  enormous  number 
of  these  trucks  constantly  hauling  parts  of  cargoes.  Vessels  of  20,000  tons 
capacity  or  greater  are  now  under  construction,  and  it  is  argued  by  Mr. 
Whinery*  that  still  larger  vessels  will  seek  dockage  here.  The  trucks 
will  not  average  over  two  tons,  so  that  10,000  trucks  or  more  may  be  expected 
to  visit  the  pier  when  loading,  and  a  similar  number  in  discharging  a  full 
cargo  from  a  vessel,  and  there  are  many  vessels  along  this  front  taking  or 
discharging  cargoes  simultaneously. 

It  is  not  known  to  the  Board  what  proportion  of  the  cargoes  of  vessels 
entering  and  leaving  the  Port  of  Xew  York  and  docking  along  Manhattan 
Island  originates  upon  Manhattan  Island,  or  what  part  of  cargoes  arriving 
lodges  there  finally.  All  parts  of  these  cargoes  originating  outside  of 
Manhattan  Island,  or  distributed  throughout  the  United  States  from  this 
island,  must  now  be  hauled  again  and  again  through  the  streets  of  New 
York,  and  much  of  it  carried  across  a  river  also,  and  the  argument  now 
submitted  by  Mr.  Whinery  is  that  this  tax  should  be  continued,  and  even 
increased,  at  the  expense  and  inconvenience  of  the  public. 

If  this  freight,  or  articles  of  commerce,  be  distributed  by  rail,  it  must 
be  by  means  of  two  systems  entering  Manhattan  Island,  seven  with  termini 
in  New  Jersey,  and  one  with  terminus  on  Long  Island.  The  hauling  of  these 
articles  of  commerce  on  Manhattan  Island  back  and  forth  through  crowded 
streets,  and  the  ferrying  of  much  of  it  to  and  fro  across  rivers,  when  it 
might  be  avoided  by  better  location  of  docks,  is  not  in  the  interest  either 
of  the  Port  of  New  York  in  comparison  with  other  ports  of  entry  in  the 
United  States  not  so  handicapped,  or  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  who 
must  ultimately  pay  the  cost  of  such  expensive  hauling  of  goods  out  of 
place.  It  is  not  to  the  advantage  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  have 
their  commerce  pay  undue  tolls  at  this  port,  nor  is  it  to  the  advantage  of  the 
Port  to  compel  commerce  destined  elsewhere  to  be  handled  and  rehandled 
on  Manhattan  Island. 

If  commerce  is  deserting  the  Port  of  New  York,  it  is  simply  because  it  is 
to  the  benefit  of  the  country  at  large  to  transact  its  business  along  lines 
of  less  resistance.  This  harbor  or  port  must  furnish  facilities  for  commerce 
along  the  most  economical  lines. 

Considerable  space  in  Mr.  Whinery 's  report  is  taken  up  with  a  descrip- 
tion of  this  congestion  of  business  now  existing  in  New  York  at  the  locality 
in  question,  and  it  is  stated  that  the  enlarged  and  improved  dock  facilities 
in  progress  and  in  contemplation  will  greatly  concentrate  commercial  busi- 
ness already  greatly  congested  in  that  vicinity.  In  view  of  this  it  would 
seem  unfortunate  that  the  City  had  determined  upon  this  particular  locality, 
and  had  inaugurated  extensive  and  costly  improvements  at  a  point  where 
such  great  congestion  already  exists  and  must  be  materially  increased  thereby, 
and  especially  to  select  for  its  longest  piers  that  part  of  the  river  where 
their  construction  would  be  most  objectionable  

The  general  public  of  the  United  States  is  very  much  interested  in  the 
question  whether  the  advantages  of  this  harbor — in  great  measure  increased 
and  made  available  by  expenditures  from  funds  in  large  part  contributed 
by  such  public — are  properly  and  economically  used  for  the  general  benefit. 

*  Mr.  S.  Whinery,  an  engineer,  was  commissioned  by  the  Mayor  to  inves- 
tigate the  subject  of  pier  extension. 


91 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


It  is  a  matter  of  indifference  to  the  people  at  large  whether  their  harbors 
are  in  the  States  of  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Virginia,  Louisiana,  or  else- 
where within  the  National  domain,  provided  that  the  most  economical  lines 
of  traffic,  so  far  as  affects  their  resources  and  business,  are  followed.  An 
argument,  therefore,  based  upon  the  advantages  to  accrue  to  a  particular 
city  or  State  has  and  should  have  no  force,  unless  at  the  same  time  it  is 
shown  that  the  general  public  will  be  the  gainer,  or  at  least  not  a  loser, 
by  the  execution  of  the  proposed  project. 

The  Board  also  observes  that,  in  its  opinion,  there  is  nowhere  shown 
in  Mr.  Whinery's  paper  any  necessity  for  an  advancement  into  the  channel 
of  North  River  of  the  harbor  lines  at  this  point.  Nearly  all  the  facts  stated 
by  him  are  against  long  piers  in  this  vicinity,  even  if  the  river  were  not 
already  too  contracted  there. 

He  shows: 

(a)  That  long  piers  are  now  constructed  and  maintained  much  more 
economically  in  this  immediate  vicinity,  on  the  opposite  shore  of  the  North 
River,  in  New  Jersey,  and  at  other  points  in  New  York  Harbor. 

(b)  That  all  freight  constituting  cargoes  of  vessels  landing  along  Man- 
hattan Island  is  carried  and  distributed  by  trucks,  and  that  the  streets  of 
New  York  are  now  too  much  congested,  and  must  be  still  more  so  should 
these  piers  be  built,  unless  costly  methods  not  now  provided  for  be  installed 
for  handling  it. 

(c)  That  the  steamship  lines  directly,  and  their  patrons  indirectly, 
must  pay  for  the  increased  cost  of  piers  along  Manhattan  Island,  or,  in 
other  words,  that  the  commerce  of  the  port  handled  at  such  piers  must 
be  more  heavily  taxed  than  if  handled  elsewhere  in  the  harbor. 

(d)  That  on  account  of  heavy  port  charges  and  lack  of  economical 
facilities  in  New  York  Harbor,  commerce  is  seeking  other  ports. 

Mr.  Whinery  does  not  show  that  the  construction  of  long  piers  in  this 
vicinity  will  result  in  less  taxing  of  commerce,  but  he  argues  that  it  is  now 
expedient  (and  advantageous  for  the  Borough  of  Manhattan)  to  build  long 
piers  in  connection  with  an  important  improvement  now  in  progress  in  this 
vicinity,  and  that  the  conditions  are  now  favorable  for  constructing  such 
piers. 

Under  his  showing  it  is  simply  a  matter  of  convenience  and  expediency 
in  the  interests  of  the  Borough  of  Manhattan;  but  he  does  not  show  that 
such  extension  would  be  In  the  interest  of  the  general  public  or  even  of  the 
Port  of  New  York. 

In  conclusion,  the  New  York  Harbor  Line  Board  has  to  report  that 
after  maturely  considering  the  arguments  of  Mr.  Whinery  and  all  the 
bearing  of  the  case,  it  is  confirmed  in  the  opinion,  heretofore  expressed, 
that  it  is  not  to  the  interest  of  the  public  that  the  harbor  lines  be  advanced 
in  his  vicinity,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  such  an  extension  as  is  requested 
would  be  against  the  public  interests,  inasmuch  as  it  would  diminish  the 
navigable  capacity  of  North  River  and  be  obstructive  to  navigation,  while 
at  the  same  time  offering  no  compensating  advantages  to  the  public  at  large. 

The  Board,  therefore,  respectfully  recommends  that  the  application  be 
denied. 

Respectfully  submitted:  CHAS.  R.  SUTTER,  Colonel,  Corps  of  En- 
gineers; AMOS  STICKNEY,  Colonel,  Corps  of  Engineers;  W.  L.  MARSHALL, 
Major,  Corps  of  Engineers. 

New  York  City,  Dec.  2,  1903. 


92 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  14)       Assessed  Valuations  by  Boroughs,  1913 


Ordinary  Land 
Value 

Improvements 

Special 
Franchises 

Real  Estate  of 
Corporations 

Personal 
Property 

Total 

Manhattan  . 
The  Bronx  . 
Brooklyn 
Queens  .  .  . 
Richmond 

$3,155,389,410 
332,354,808 
782,660,179 
280,223,990 
40,263,963 

$1,587,341,496 
240,453,355 
776,434,353 
156,026,337 
36,089,213 

$297,674,923 
24,741,625 
98,440,849 
15,428,524 
2,575,660 

$86,536,766 
42,790,805 
22,478,210 
26,113,9^5 
2,629,410 

$265,509,435 
5,094,060 
46,296,870 
6,740,850 
1,777,225 

$5,392,452,030 
645,434,653 
1,726,310,461 
484,533,686 
83,335,471 

Total  . 

$4,590,892,350 

$2,796,344,754 

$438,861,581 

$180,549,176 

$325,418,440 

$8,332,066,301 

— From  the  Municipal  Tear-Book  of  the  City  of  New  York,  1913. 


Increiase:  in  Population 

or  TMC  VARIOUS  BOROUGHS  OF 

New  Yor\^  City 

BY  DEICADCS  FROM  ISOO  TO  I9l0  AND  ESTinATEID  FROn  i9l0  TO 

BY  Tme:  Board  of  Water  Supply  of  that  city 

POPULATION 


80S 

o       5  gi 


8     8     g  S 

O       eg       CO  5 


/ 

ICMMO 

(D 

1940 


POPULATION 
4.000.000 


(Note  15)  Statistics  on  Population 

Estimated  Population  July  1,  1913 

Manhattan    2,487,796 

The   Bronx    583,981 

Brooklyn    1,845,443 

Queens    359,891 

Eichmond    95,872 


5,372,983 

Area  of  City 

Boroughs                                                      In  Acres  In  Square  Miles 

Manhattan                                                                   14,038  21.93 

The   Bronx                                                                  26,017  40.65 

Brooklyn                                                                     49,680  77.62 

Queens                                                                      82,883  129.50 

Richmond                                                                    36,600  57.19 


Total    209,218*  326.89 

*  Compare  with  note  on  page  11.     There  is  some  discrepancy  between 


the  several  methods  of  computing-  the  City's  area.  The  Brooklyn  Eagle 
Almanac  gives  202,068  acres. 


93 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


Density  of  Population  Per  Acre  July  1,  1913 


Manhattan    173.6 

The  Bronx    20.4 

Brooklyn    35.7 

Queens    4.0 

Richmond   2.5 

Average  for  City   24.7 

Density  of  Population  Per  Acre  in  Several  Selected  Wards 
(1910  Census) 

Manhattan — 

Fourth    257.1 

Seventh    515.6 

Tenth    604.0 

Eleventh    696.7 

Thirteenth    604.3 

The  Bronx— 

Twenty-Third    63.0 

Brooklyn — 

Fifth    162.5 

Sixteenth    278.7 

Twenty-seventh    189.6 

Queens — 

First    13.3 

Richmond — 

First   8.1 


— From  the  Municipal  Year-Book  of  the  City  of  New  York,  1913. 


(Note  16) 

1910  Population  of  Wards  in  Brooklyn  and  Queens,  Constitu= 
ting  the  "Jamaica  Bay  District"  (According  to  U.  S.  Census) 


Brooklyn  1910  1900,  Increase 

Twenty-six    177,963  66,086  111,877 

Twenty-nine    72.351  27,188  45,163 

Thirty-one    30,988  14,609  16,379 

Thirty-two   17,419  8,243  9,176 

Queens, 

Four    67,412  30,761  36,651 

Five    12,476  7,193  5,283 


378,609         154,080  224,529 

Increase  from  1900-1910  equals  146%. 

Population  estimated  in  1914,  599,716,  on  basis  of  continuing  same  rate 
of  growth. 

As  a  city,  would  rank  seventh  among  the  cities  of  the  United  States. 


94 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(^ote  17)  Harbor  Statistics 

Number  of  Miles  of  Straight  Waterfront  Measured  Along  the  Shore  Line: 

Port  of  New  York    771  miles 

New  York  City    578 

New  Jersey    193 

Number  of  Miles  of  Waterfront  Measured  Around  Piers  and  Shore  Line: 

Port  of  New  York    921  miles 

New  York  City    681  " 

New  Jersey    240  " 

Number  of  Miles  of  Improved  Waterfront  Measured  Along  the  Shore  Line: 

Port  of  New  York    166  miles 

New  York  City    103 

New  Jersey    63  " 

Number  of  Miles  of  Improved  Waterfront  Measured  Around  Piers  and  Shore 
Line: 

New  York  City    259  miles** 

Number  of  Miles  of  Waterfront  in  the  Port  of  New  York  Publicly  Owned, 
Measured  Along  Shore  Line: 

City  of  New  York    127  miles 

Number  of  Miles  of  Waterfront  in  the  Port  of  New  York  Publicly  Owned, 
Measured  Around  Pier  and  Shore  Line: 

City  of  New  York    159  miles 

Number  of  Miles  of  Waterfront  in  the  Port  of  New  York  Publicly  Owned 
that  Have  Been  Improved,  Measured  Around  the  Shore  Line: 

City  of  New  York    47  miles 

Number  of  Miles  of  Waterfront  in  the  Port  of  New  York  Publicly  Owned 
that  Have  Been  Improved,  Measured  Around  the  Pier  and  Shore  Line: 

City  of  New  York    79  miles 

Area  of  the  Port  of  New  York    175  square  miles 

— From  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.   Smith,  New 
York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 

*  Through  typographical  error  this  item  was  given  as  227  miles  in  the 
authority  quoted;  the  exact  figure  is  102.58  miles.  The  correction  of  this 
figure  involved  the  change  of  the  item  immediately  above  it  from  290  miles 
to  166  miles. 

**  This  figure  includes  the  wall  along  the  Speedway  and  other  non-commercial 
development  ;the  total  City  waterfront  improved  with  wharfage  is  224  miles. 

(Note  18) 

Appropriations  for  the  Improvement  of  the  Rivers  and  Harbors 
of  the  United  States  from  the  Foundation  of  the  Government 
up  to  June  30,  1913 

Following  is  a  careful  compilation  made  up  from  data  in  the  possession 
of  the  United  States  Government,  showing  the  amount  of  the  appropriations 
for  the  improvement  of  the  rivers  and  harbors  of  the  United  States,  by  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  from  the  foundation  of  the  Government  tip  to 
June  30,  1913,  and  such  other  contributions  as  are  of  record  as  having  been 
made  by  States,  municipalities,  individuals  and  private  interests  for  the  same 
purpose: 

Total  appropriations  by  United  States  for  rivers  and  harbors 

to  June  30,  1912    $697,311,347.06 

River  and  Harbor  Act,  July  25,  1912    31,059,370.50 

Appropriations,  Sundry  Civil  Act,  August  24,  1912   9,500,250.00 

River  and  Harbor  Act,  March  4,  1913   41,073,094.00 

Appropriations,  Sundry  Civil  Act,  June  23,  1913   10,045,795.00 

Deficiency  Act,  March  4,  1913   1,157.89 

Permanent  Annual  Appropriations   297,600.00 

Total    $789,288,614.45 


96 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


Individual  appropriations,  care  of  canals,  removing  sunken 

vessels,  etc   $2,338,115.74 

Eelated  expenditures,  California  Debris  Commission,  preven- 
tion of  deposit  in  New  York  Harbor,  International  Water- 
wavs  Commission,  engineer  school  for  river  and  harbor 

instruction    217,010.00 

The  above  statistics  show  a  grand  total  of  expenditures  for  rivers  and 

harbors  and  related  work  from  the  earliest  operations  of  tlie  Government  up 

to  the  present  time  of  $791,843,740.19. 

This,  of  course,  takes  no  account  of  appropriations  for  Panama  Canal, 

upon  which  there  had  been  expended  up  to  December  31,  1913,  a  total  of 

$314,726,717.73. 


Amounts  Expended  by  the  United  Stat 
Channels  in  the  Harbor  of  New  York 

Same 

Project 


es  upon  Improvement  of 
and  for  Maintenance  of 

From  Estab-   During  Two 
lislunent  of    Fiscal  Years 
Government   Ending  June 
until  June  30,     30,  1913 
1911 


Arthur  Kill,  between  Staten  Island  and  New 
Jersey,  and  channel  north  of  Shooters 
Island,    between    New    York    and  New 

Jersev    .$706,490.97 

Bronx  Eiver    29,000.00 

Bronx  River  and  East  Chester  Creek    73,598.68 

Buttermilk  Channel    630,024.51 

Canarsie  Bay    64,574.18 

Conev  Island  Channel     

East  Chester  Creek    90,901.32 

East  River  and  Hell  Gate    4,827,517.50 

Flushing  Bav    122,595.53 

Gedney's  Channel    200,000.00 

Gowauus  Bav    3,468,107.62 

Harlem  River    1,585,000.00 

Hudson  River  Channel,  New  York  Harbor    

Jamaica   Bay    10,449,15 

Newtown  Creek    445,498.00 

New  York  Harbor  (including  Ambrose  Channel)  6,979,622.14 

Sandy  Hook  Channel    78,883.20 

Sheepshead  Bay    26,000.00 

Staten  Island  Channel,  between  New  York  and 

New  Jersey    275,000.00 

Staten  Island  Ice  Breaker    19,482.20 

Wallabout  Channel    36,000.00 

Westchester  Creek    5,000.00 


$152,038.35 
15,639.48 


14,806.07 
53,395.00 
27,781.49 
309,477.97 
12,124.25 

409,542.88 
118,639.33 
2,826.69 
68,461.98 
26,661.65 
^383,511.69 

i,442'..56 


6,697.44 
38,837.61 


Total    $19,673,745.00  $1,641,884.44 

$19,673,745.00 
1,641,884.44 


Gross  Total    $21,315,639.44 

Deduct  amount  ' '  reimbursable  ' '  14,000.09 


Net  Total    $21,301,639.35 

Percentage  of  total  amount  appropriated  by  United  States  for  Rivers 

and  Harbors  Improvements  to  June  30,  1913   2.68 

— From  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York 
City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 
*$14,000.09  "reimbursable." 


97 


THE      PROBLEM      OF     GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(Note  19) 

Foreign  Arrivals  of  Vessels  at  New  York 


Nationality 

Steamers 

Ships 

Barks 

Bri  s 
rigs 

ScliGonGrs 

Total 
1913 

Total 
1912 

American  

614 

1 

205 

820 

782 

British  

1,738 

6 

11 

198 

1,953 

1,900 

Norwegian  .... 

528 

6 

10 

544 

454 

German  

565 

*8 

"  i 

574 

486 

Italian  

147 

i 

148 

119 

Austrian  

63 

63 

66 

Swedish  

1 

French   

178 

i 

10 

189 

170 

Belgian  

40 

40 

32 

Spanish  

28 

28 

25 

Dutch  

156 

156 

157 

Danish  

82 

82 

60 

Portuguese  .... 

5 

Russian  

on 
29 

2 

31 

29 

Argentine  .... 

2 

2 

Cuban   

108 

108 

108 

Brazilian  

9 

9 

12 

Other  

12 

7 

19 

35 

Total,  1913  .... 
Total,  1912  .... 
Total,  1911  .... 
Total,  1910  .... 

4,297 
3,905 
4,020 
3,879 

21 
10 
11 
14 

37 
48 
62 
47 

2 
2 

411 
478 
406 
558 

4,766 
4,441 
4,501 
4,500 

4,441 
4,501 
4,500 
4,502 

♦Motor  ships. 


Domestic  Arrivals  at  New  York 
From  Eastern  Ports 


Months 

Steamers 

Ships 

Barks 

Brigs 

Schooners 

Total 
1913 

Total 
1912 

January  

50 

79 

129 

101 

February  

44 

31 

75 

69 

March  

37 

33 

70 

163 

April  

43 

2 

143 

188 

212 

May  

48 

133 

181 

192 

June  

61 

166 

227 

240 

July  

75 

156 

231 

220 

August  

73 

142 

215 

225 

September  .... 

70 

153 

223 

203 

October  

48 

107 

155 

221 

November  .... 

50 

153 

203 

178 

December  .... 

45 

92 

137 

146 

Total,  1913  .    .    .  . 
Total,  1912  .... 
Total,  1911  .... 
Total,  1910  .... 

644 
700 
653 
602 

i 
1 

2 
1 
1 
3 

1,388 
1,468 
1,534 
1,717 

2,034 
4,170 
2,189 
2,322 

2,170 
2,189 
2.322 
2,937 

98 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


From  Southern  Ports 


Months 

Steamers 

onips 

Barks 

Bngs 

bcnooners 

■ 

Total 

1913 

Total 

1912 

January  

165 

2 

49 

216 

220 

February 

150 

55 

205 

219 

March 

164 

1 

82 

247 

228 

April  

162 

68 

230 

246 

May  

164 

2 

85 

251 

254 

June  

178 

1 

69 

248 

235 

July  

182 

2 

78 

262 

254 

August  

170 

1 

60 

231 

268 

September  .... 

182 

1 

59 

242 

241 

October  

ioD 

1 
1 

oD 

COL 

November  .... 

173 

45 

218 

235 

December  .... 

173 

i 

78 

252 

261 

Total,  1913  .... 
Total,  1912  .... 
Total,  ]911  .    .    .  . 
Total,  1910  .... 

2,049 
2,020 
1,969 
1,978 

2 

12 
11 

1-i 
25 

793 
877 
1,046 
J, 287 

2,854 
3,908 
3,029 
3,292 

2,908 
3,029 
3,292 
3,321 

— From  Annual  Statistical  Report  of  the  New  York  Produce  Exchange  (1913). 


(Note  20) 

Table  Showing  Percentages  of  Growth  of  Foreign  Commerce 
at  Leading  United  States  Ports 


1871  to  1880  over 

1881  to  1890  over 

1891  to  1900  over 

1901  to  1910  over 

1911  to  1913 

over 

1861  to  1870 

187 

1  to  1880 

1881  to  1890 

1891  to  1900 

1901  to  1910 

Ports 

Percentages  of 

Percentages  of 

Percentages  of 

Percentages  of 

Percentages  of 

(0 

in 

CO 

m 

1 

'a 

3 

'a 

o 

"ft, 

3 
o 

"a. 

3 

o 

a 

3 

o 

o 
H 

1 

X 

W 

H 

6 

X 

H 

e 

w 

H 

6 

X 

W 

H 

New  York    .  .  . 

57.1 

95.8 

71.8 

28.8 

26.0 

27.6 

6.4 

16.9 

10.9 

42.3 

44.8 

43.4 

38.8 

46.1 

42.9 

Boston  

45.7 

148.5 

73.9 

21.4 

88.9 

47.5 

7.5 

54.2 

31.6 

41.2 

«1.9 

15.2 

35.3 

*26.4 

4.6 

New  Orleans  .  . 

92.8 

121.6 

116.9 

*1.5.3 

9.4 

5.8 

44.7 

11.6 

15.:', 

rjs.T 

55.2 

65.8 

101.6 

9.2 

27.1 

Galveston     .  .  . 

520.2 

359.1 

370.0 

*4.3 

36.1 

33.8 

*18.3 

159.4 

lis. 'J 

•Ji:;.} 

I'.M.O 

194.5 

54.1 

59.8 

59.7 

Philadelphia    .  . 

104.8 

191.3 

146.4 

63.0 

12.2 

36.2 

31.1 

38.4 

34.6 

(■)2.5 

44.7 

36.1 

*11.6 

9.4 

Baltimore    .  .  . 

147.0 

254.4 

199.0 

*43.4 

50.3 

12.1 

2.2 

69.4 

65.4 

92.'4 

3.8 

15.8 

16.3 

8.5 

10.3 

•Decline. 


— From  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


60% 


50% 


405 


I      I      I      I      I      I  I      I      I       I  I  I       I      I       I      I       I      I  I      I       I  I 

1680  1885  I890  1895  1900  1805  1910  1915 


Variation  in  New  York's  percentage  of  the  total  Foreign  Commerce  of  the  United  States. 

99 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


(Note  21) 

Tonnage  of  Vessels  in  Foreign  Trade  that  Entered  at  Leading 
United  States  Ports  by  Single  Years,  from  1830  to  1880,  and 
Average  Annual  Tonnage  by  Decades,  from  1881  to  1913 


New  York, 
N.  Y. 


Entered 
Tons 


305,181 
547,694 
1,145,831 
1,973,812 
3,093,186 
7,611,282 
6,181,931 
7,241,695 
10,516,817 
13,855,625 


27.7 
23.9 
30.5 
39.4 
49.0 
49.9 
45.6 
38.3 
38.8 
39.5 


Philadelphia, 
Pa. 


Entered 
Tons 


77,016 
39,070 
132,370 
182,162 
300,006 
1,391,312 
1,093,541 
1,566,639 
2,112,097 
2,752,350 


Boston, 
Mass. 


Entered 
Tons 


113,238 
291,323 
478,859 
718,587 
793,927 
1,347,447 
1,327,234 
1,816,206 
2,761,388 
2,951,322 


% 


10.3 
12.7 
12.8 
14.3 
12.6 
8.8 
9.8 
9.6 
10.1 
8.4 


New  Orleans, 
La. 


Entered 
Tons 


349,949 
632,398 
458,447 
760,910 
759,458 
1,224,376 
1,789,421 
2,259,656 


9.3 
12.6 
7.3 
5.0 
5.6 
6.4 
6.6 
6.4 


Baltimore, 
Md. 


Entered 
Tons 


61,121 
89,748 
99,588 
186,417 
272,290 
1,502,713 
744,153 
1,115,134 
1,377,365 
1,355,106 


-From  "  Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


(Note  22) 

Value  of  Imports  and   Exports  of   Merchandise  at  Leading 
United  States  Ports  by  Decades 


Fiscal 
Year 

Ports 

Average 
Annual  Value 
of  Imports 

Per 
Cent 

Average 
Annual  Value 
of  Exports 

Per 
Cent 

Average  Annual 
Value  of  Imports 
and  Exports 

Per 
Cent 

1861-70 

New  York 

$227,408,703 

64.8 

1137,648,066 

34.5 

1365,056,769 

48.7 

Boston 

35,967,959 

10.2 

13,397,()28 

3.3 

49,365,587 

6.5 

New  Orleans 

6,884,028 

1.9 

35,695,965 

8.9 

42,579,9!  »3 

5.7 

Philadelphia 

11,516,632 

3.2 

10,697,226 

2.() 

22,213,858 

3.0 

Baltimore 

9,6<)1,37() 

2.7 

9,(>36,169 

2.4 

19,327,539 

2.5 

Galveston 

221,405 

.0() 

3,133,547 

.8 

3,354,952 

0.4 

1871-80 

New  York 

357,430,909 

66.7 

269,565,783 

45.7 

626,996,692 

55.7 

New  Orleans 

13,244,561 

2.4 

79,120,011 

13.4 

92,364,572 

8.2 

Boston 

52,421,466 

9.7 

33,422,197 

5.6 

85,843,663 

7.6 

Baltimore 

23,542,156 

4.4 

34,151,144 

5.2 

57,()93,300 

5.0 

Philadelphia 

23,584,576 

4.4 

31,162,248 

5.7 

54,746,S24 

5.0 

Galveston 

1,383,235 

2 

14,387,692 

2.4 

15,770,927 

1.4 

1881-90 

New  York 

4()0,475,898 

6().3 

339,724,966 

44.4 

800,200,8()4 

55.1 

Boston 

63,()37,221 

9.2 

()3,135,()71 

8.2 

126,772,81)2 

8.6 

New  Orleans 

11,195,278 

86,612,929 

11.2 

97,S(  )8,207 

6.7 

Philadelphia 

38,478,519 

5.5 

36,093,()16 

4.7 

74,572,135 

5.2 

Baltimore 

13,333,911 

1.9 

51,334,249 

6.6 

64,()(;s,l()0 

4.4 

Galveston 

1,322,914 

.1 

19,()82,955 

2.4 

21,005,869 

1.4 

1891-00 

New  York 

490,142,932 

64.2 

397,291,510 

3S.8 

887,434,442 

49.6 

Boston 

6S,4(').",,638 

<).() 

{>7,3()(  ),6()8 

9.7 

165,824,306 

9.3 

New  Orleans 

1(),207,859 

2.1 

!)(),73( ),( K  )5 

9.5 

112,!)37,864 

6.3 

Baltimore 

13,()30,713 

1.7 

86,S<)8,8(  )8 

S.4 

1 00,52!  »,521 

5.7 

Philadelphia 

50,450,865 

6.4 

49,963,545 

4.7 

10(  1,414,410 

5.6 

Galveston 

1,080,312 

.1 

51,069,128 

4.7 

52,149,440 

2.8 

100 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


Value  of  Imports  and  Exports  of  Merchandise  at  Leading 
United  States  Ports  by  Decades— Continued 


Per 
Cent 

A\"erage  Annual 
Value  of  Imports 
and  Exports 

rev 
Cent 

35.5 

1,272,997,762 

45.9 

5.8 

192,091,896 

7.0 

9.3 

187,252,261 

6.8 

9.3 

153,567,<)82 

5.4 

5.0 

145,34n,2S4 

5.2 

5.6 

116,449,592 

4.2 

37.4 

1,809,358,239 

46.2 

10.6 

245,256,737 

6.2 

7.2 

238,72!),254 

6.0  ■ 

3.1 

201,089,605 

5.4 

3.2 

159,071,988 

4.0 

4.3 

128,438,067 

3.4 

Ports 


New  York 

Boston 

New  Orleans 

Galveston 

Philadelphia 

Baltimore 

New  York 

Galveston 

New  Orleans 

Boston 

Philadelphia 

Baltimore 


Average 
Annual  Value 
of  Imports 


697,726,032 
96,669,251 
37,079,867 
3,385,920 
64,125,104 
26,231,394 

9(58,542,546 
5,220,447 
74,737,094 

l;50,S2!l,!)()9 
87,391,503 
30,502,680 


Per 
Cent 


60.5 
8.3 
3.1 
.2 
5.5 
2.2 

58.1 
•> 

4.4 
7.6 
5.3 
2.1 


Average 
Annual  Value 
of  Exports 


575,271,730 
95,422,645 
150,172,374 
150,182,062 
81,215,180 
90,218,198 

840,815,693 
240,036,290 
163,992,160 
70,259,636 
71,780,485 
97,935,387 


■From  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


(Note  23) 

Value  of  Imports  and  Exports  and  Net  Tonnage  of  Vessels 
that  Entered  and  Cleared  in  Foreign  Trade  at  the  Four  Prin= 
cipal  Seaports  of  the  World 


Year 


1910 
1909 
1909 
1909 

1911 
1910 
1910 
1910 

1912 
1911 
1911 
1911 

1913 
1912 
1912 
1912 


Values  of 
Imports 


$935,990,956 
1,000,746,471 
723,146,084 
810,179,970 

881,592,689 
1,110,828,205 
828,620,152 
872,629,975 

975,744,320 
1,119,238,957 
962,925,352 
778,225,287 

1,048,290,629 
1,096,550,183 
1,164,769,445 
872,320,787 


Values  of 
Exports 


$651,986,356 
569,256,326 
728,131,030 
578,343,753 


Total 


$1,587,977,314 
1,570,002,792 
1,451,277,114 
1,388,523,723 


772,552,449  1,654,145,138 

643,014,124  1,753,842,32<) 

829,250,836  1,657,870,988 

661,480,352  1,534,110,327 

817,945,803  1,793,690,123 

672,618,684  1,791,857,641 


711,261,824 
859,055,190 

917,935,988 
864,229,672 
702,161,337 
944,662,492 


1,674,187,176 
1,637,280,447 

1,966,326,617 
1,960,779,855 
1,866,930,782 
1,816,983,279 


Net  Tonnage 
of  Vessels 
Entered 


13,042,318 

11,605,698 
7,747,994 
11,061,041 

13,428,950 
12,154,162 
7,588,653 
11,417,773 

13,673,765 
11,973,249 
11,830,949 
7,887,719 

14,464,161 
13,567,913 
10,800,716 
7,253,016 


— From  "  Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York  City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


101 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(Note  24) 


World's  Merchant  Marine 


Table  showing  increase  in  size  of  vessels  and  growth  of  steam  tonnage 
(Vessels  of  over  100  tons) 

Per  cent. 
22  Years. 
Increase -f 
Decrease — 
—6.1 
+  101.3 
+211.9 
—55.2 


Number  of  Vessels  Total, 

Tonnage   Total, 

Steam   Gross  Tons, 

Sail   Net  Tons, 


1890 
32,298 
22,151,651 
12,985,372 
9,166,279 


1912 
30,316 
44,600,677 
40,518,177 
4,082,500 


Merchant  Marine  of  United  States 

Table  showing  increase  in  size  of  vessels  and  growth  of  steam  tonnage 
(Vessels  of  over  100  tons) 

Per  cent 
22  Years, 
Increase + 

1890  1912  Decrease- 
Number  of  Vessels  Total,                23,467  3,442  —85.3 

Tonnage   Total,  4,424,497  5,258,487  +18.8 

Steam   Gross  Tons,  1,859,088  4,107,849  +120.9 

Sail   Net  Tons,  2,565,409  1,150,638  —55.1 

In  1890  the  United  States  had  20  per  cent  of  the  world's  shipping  ton- 
nage.  In  1912  its  share  was  11.7  per  cent. 

— From  "Commerce  of  the  Ports  of  the  World,"  by  R.  A.  C.  Smith,  New  York 
City  Commissioner  of  Docks. 


(Note  25) 

The    Merchants'   Association    upon    New    York's  "Wasteful" 

Policy 

The  commerce  of  the  Port  has  far  outgrown  its  facilities.  The  City  is 
constantly  compelled  to  deny  applications  for  dock  facilities,  thus  driving 
commerce  to  other  ports. 

Expenditures  by  the  City  made  for  docks  and  harbors  are  paying  divi- 
dends into  the  City  treasury,  sometimes  as  high  as  seventeen  per  cent  upon 
the  investment.  Such  expenditures  are  not  counted  in  estimating  the  margin 
of  the  City's  borrowing  capacity  above  the  Constitutional  limit. 

Owing  to  the  lack  of  a  comprehensive  plan  which  shall  provide  for  the 
future,  much  of  the  waterfront  development  work  already  done  has  been 
wasteful.  Moreover,  a  considerable  number  of  the  City's  232  piers  are  occu- 
pied by  railroads  because  the  creation  of  direct  connections  between  the  rail 
and  water  has  been  neglected. 

While  other  ports  are  eagerly  competing  for  commerce.  New  York  hitherto 
has  been  actually  turning  commerce  away  because  it  has  lacked  the  necessary 
wharf  and  dock  facilities. — From  "Greater  New  York,"  February  9,  1914, 
OflS.cial  Bulletin  of  the  Merchants'  Association  of  New  York. 


102 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  26)  Requirements  of  Commerce, 

The  first  requirement  of  a  great  port  like  New  York  is  ample  space  for 
the  accommodation  of  water  carriers,  in  close  relation  to  railroads,  warehouses 
and  the  active  business  district  of  the  City. 

To  understand  this  feature  a  knowledge  is  necessary  of  the  extent  and 
usage  of  the  available  water  frontage  near  the  commercial  section  of  Man- 
hattan Island,  as  given  in  the  following  table. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  foreign  and  domestic  steamship  lines  each  have 
but  13  per  cent  of  the  available  river  frontage;  whereas  the  railroads  utilize 
21  per  cent  for  the  reception  and  delivery  of  freight,  and  with  existing 
methods  of  distribution  will  need  a  larger  percentage  in  the  future  to  accom- 
modate their  growing  traflfic.  The  canal  interests  w^ill  also  require  more 
space  upon  the  completion  of  the  Erie  Canal  enlargement. 

With  the  available  water  frontage  on  the  commercial  portion  of  Man- 
hattan Island  incapable  of  enlargement,  and  with  an  urgent  demand  by  the 
water  carriers  for  more  room,  it  is  apparent  that  some  method  of  land  car- 
riage must  be  devised  that  will  decrease  rather  than  increase  the  need  for 
railroad  space  on  the  waterfront.  The  evidence  given  before  the  New  York 
Commerce  Commission  in  1900  shows  conclusively  that  something  must  be 
done  to  enlarge  the  waterfront  facilities  of  Manhattan  Island  if  the  Port  is 
to  maintain  its  pre-eminence. 

A  knowledge  of  the  volume  and  cost  of  handling  trafl&c  on  Manhattan 
Island  is  essential  to  an  intelligent  conclusion.  The  tonnage  that  more  vitally 
affects  the  subject  under  discussion  is  the  part  that  requires  draying  on  the 
City  streets.  From  the  carriers  and  other  authoritative  sources  the  following 
information  has  been  obtained,  applicable  to  the  years  1906-1907 : 


Approximate  Tonnages  of  the  Principal  Rail  and  Water  Carriers  Requiring 
Drayage  in  Manhattan 

Merchandise            Coal  Total 

Carriers                                        (Tons)               (Tons)  (Tons) 

Railroads: 

Rail  delivery    2,000,000 

Water  delivery  .  .  7,800,000 

  9,800,000           4,000,000  13,800,000 

North  River  south    East  River  south 

User                        of  72nd  St.            of  44th  St.  Totals, 

No.  Lineal  ft.  %     No.  Lineal  ft.  %     No.  Lin.  ft.  % 

Railroads,  exclusive 

of  Ferries                   8       9,460      30      6      2,680      10       14  12,140  21 

Foreign  Steamships.  12       7,446      23      1        137         i/o    13  7,583  13 

Coastwise,  River  and 

Sound  Lines              16       4,084      13      7      3,208      12       23  7,292  121/2 

Ferries                          10       2,132       7    12      3,010      11       22  5,142  9 

Municipal   Purposes.    5       1,962       6    10      2,415       9        15  4,377  7% 

Miscellaneous  Pur- 
poses                                  6,451      21     .  .     15,620      57^2     •  •  22,071  37 

Totals                            31,535    100          27,070    100  58,605  100 

103 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 

Merchandise         Coal  Total 
Carriers  (Tons)  (Tons)  (Tons) 

Foreign  Steamship  Lines: 
Terminating  on  Manhat- 
tan Island    1,400,000 

Terminating  in  New  Jer- 
sey   800,000 

  2,200,000    2,200,000 

Coastwise  Lines  (incomplete)    2,900,000    2,900,000 

River  and  Sound  Lines  (incomplete)  .  .        1,300,000    1,300,000 

Irregular  Lines  (incomplete)    3,000,000    3,000,000 


Totals    19,200,000       4,000,000  23,200,000 

The  cost  of  handling  this  tonnage  is  of  vital  importance.  With  the 
exception  of  the  portion  of  the  New  York  Central  tonnage  that  is  drayed  to 
and  from  its  rail  termini  on  Manhattan  Island,  all  freight  carried  by  the  rail- 
roads requires  lighterage,  and  break  of  bulk  on  the  waterfront.  The  cost  of 
the  lighterage  in  connection  with  this  service  was  investigated  by  the  New 
York  Commerce  Commission  in  1900.  and  was  found  to  widely  vary,  depend- 
ing on  the  class  of  freight,  the  method  of  water  transportation  and  the  places 
of  distribution.  The  average  result,  however,  including  interest,  deprecia- 
tion, taxes,  and  insurance  on  plant  and  structures,  and  cost  of  wages  and 
supplies,  was  shown  to  vary  from  83  cents  to  88  cents  per  ton.  No  conclusive 
evidence  was  produced  as  to  terminal  costs  on  both  sides  of  the  river,  includ- 
ing rentals,  handling  of  freight  and  similar  items;  but  data  have  been  obtained 
from  other  authoritative  sources.  The  cost  of  cartage  on  the  City  streets  is 
found  to  vary,  depending  on  the  length  of  haul  and  the  character  of  freight. 
For  certain  commodities  it  is  as  low  as  60  cents  per  ton,  and  for  others  as 
high  as  $1.25  or  more  per  ton.  An  average  of  80  cents  per  ton  is  considered 
to  be  a  conservative  figure. 

The  following  estimates  of  the  cost  of  handling  freight  from  the  out- 
lying yards  of  the  railroad  companies  west  of  Bergen  Hill,  New  Jersey,  and 
60th  Street,  New  York,  to  the  shipper,  are  believed  to  be  low  rather  than  high: 

Railroad  Merchandise:  Per  Ton 

Terminal  costs  on  the  New  Jersev  side  of  North  River  and  at  Six- 
tieth Street   I  

Lighterage  or  equivalent  charges   

Terminal  cost  on  waterfront,  Manhattan  Island   

Cost  to  railroads   

Cartage  defrayed  by  shippers   


Total  cost  from  outlying  yards  to  sliippers   $2.25 

Coal: 

Handling,  storage  and  lighterage  or  ferriage   $0.40 

Cartage   .60 

Total    $1.00 

Steamship  Merchandise: 

Cartage    $0.80 

Based  on  these  figures  the  approximate  annual  terminal  charges  at  Man- 
hattan Island  for  the  tonnages  handled  by  the  principal  carriers,  exclusive 
of  the  large  traffic  of  the  minor  carriers,  are: 

Per  Annum 

9,800,000  tons  at  $2.25    $22,050,000 

9,400,000  tons  at      .80    7,520,000 

4,000,000  tons  at    1.00    4,000,000 


23,200,000  tons    $33,570,000 


104 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


In  addition  to  the  tonnage  passing  between  the  carriers  and  the  shippers, 
there  is  a  large  volume  of  business  that  is  redistributed  from  manufactories 
and  warehouses  to  consumers.  Owing  to  the  time  required  to  obtain  reliable 
information  on  this  feature,  no  attempt  has  been  made  to  include  it  in  this 
report;  but  in  seeking  for  a  solution  of  the  freight  problem  the  necessity  for 
more  economical  and  expeditious  methods  of  subdistribution  should  not  be 
forgotten. 

One  of  the  handicaps  of  the  commerce  of  the  Port  is  the  delay  in  deliv- 
eries, due  to  the  time  taken  for  the  lighterage  of  freight  to  and  from  the 
Island,  and  the  interruptions  from  fogs  and  snow  storms.  Under  favorable 
conditions  the  minimum  time  required  for  the  transfer  of  freight  from  the 
New  Jersey  side  of  the  North  Kiver  to  the  consignee  on  the  Island  is  from 
three  to  six  hours.  An  improved  method  of  freight  distribution  should  seek 
to  reduce  this  time. 

The  growing  importance  of  the  Port,  as  testified  to  before  the  New  York 
Commerce  Commission  of  1900,  is  causing  congestion  of  trafldc  in  the  Harbor 
to  such  a  degree  that  the  time  is  not  far  distant  when  this  will  become  a 
serious  disadvantage,  and,  therefore,  should  have  consideration  in  determining 
what  shall  be  done  to  improve  the  situation. 

The  inaccessibility  of  the  waterfront  to  the  general  public  has  a  retard- 
ing effect  uj3on  its  growth,  more  particularly  along  the  East  River,  where 
rapid  transit  facilities  are  so  far  removed  as  to  discourage  the  selection  of 
that  side  of  the  Island  for  passenger  boat  traffic.  From  the  standpoint  of 
commerce,  improved  passenger  transportation  methods  should  be  considered 
in  conjunction  with  a  study  of  the  freight  problem. 

To  summarize,  the  commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York  requires  a  solution 
of  the  freight  problem  that  will  abolish  change  of  bulk  on  the  waterfront,  and 
thus  afford  space  for  the  expansion  of  steamship  traffic;  expedite  deliveries; 
facilitate  interchange  of  freight;  reduce  harbor  congestion;  improve  acces- 
sibility of  the  waterfront  to  the  public;  and  decrease  costs  of  freight  dis- 
tribution and  subdistribution. — Eroni  Report  submitted  to  the  Eirst  District 
by  the  Amsterdam  Corporation,  September  25,  1908. 


(Note  27) 

New  York  City's  Greatness  and  Its  Needs 

At  this  time,  when  some  of  our  fellow  citizens  in  other  ports  of  the 
United  States  are  pleased  to  speak  of  the  Empire  State  of  New  York  as 
"Darkest  America,"  it  may  be  well  for  us,  like  Livingston  and  Stanley,  to 
make  a  trip  of  exploration  and  discovery,  to  find  out  something  about  this 
"Darkest  America."  We  learn  at  the  outset  that  among  all  the  States  she 
is  first  in  population,  first  in  commerce,  first  in  manufactures,  first  in  banking 
and  first  in  transportation  by  rail  and  water. 

Moreover,  she  lias  held  this  pre-eminence  for  many  years.  She  took 
the  lead  in  population  in  1810.  She  became  first  in  industry  in  1820.  She 
had  been  easily  first  in  banking  since  1837.  She  has  always  been  a  leader 
in  promoting  transportation  facilities.  Her  commerce  has  exceeded  that  of 
all  competitors  for  more  than  a  century. 

This  supremacy  is  due  chiefly  to  water.  With  one  of  the  three  or  four 
most  spacious  harbors  in  the  world — and  the  one  which  can  be  most  inex- 
pensively maintained  and  developed  for  the  expanding  needs  of  modern 
shipping,  with  lakes  and  rivers  supplying  unequalled  sources  of  transportation 
and  power,  with  a  canal  system  which,  built,  preserved  and  enlarged  en- 
tirely at  the  expense  of  the  State,  without  outside  aid,  has  linked  the  Mis- 
sissippi Valley  wath  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  it  was  inevitable  that  a  vast  popu- 
lation should  gather  around  the  w^aterways  of  New  York,  that  commerce  and 
industry  should  thrive,  that  over  8,000  miles  of  railway  should  be  built 
within  our  boundaries,  and  that  every  important  Eastern  trunk  line  should 
expend  millions  in  building  terminals  in  and  around  our  great  harbor.  When, 


105 


THE 


PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


several  years  ago,  I  asked  President  Cassatt  why  it  was  that  the  Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad  was  spending  $125,000,000  in  order  to  get  into  New  York  he 
replied  by  asking  me  what  1  thought  the  Pennsylvania  system  would  amount 
to  without  a  terminal  there. 

The  Danger  from  Competition 

In  like  manner,  I  might  ask  you  what  the  State  of  New  York  would 
amount  to  with  her  big  harhors  closed  and  the  Hudson  dried  up.  She  might 
be  a  Vermont  or  a  New  Hampshire,  but  she  would  not  be  the  Empire  State. 

But  there  are  in  the  United  States  other  harbors  besides  that  of  New 
Y'ork,  other  lakes  besides  Erie,  other  rivers  besides  the  Hudson,  other  canals 
besides  the  Erie  and  the  Champlaiu.  We  have  been  greatly  blessed  in  our 
geographical  position,  but  we  have  no  monopoly.  Never  before  In  the  history 
of  this  country  has  there  been  so  keen  a  competition  between  ports,  between 
States  and  between  cities  as  there  is  at  this  time  for  commerce  and  manu- 
facturing. This  State  and  urban  competition  is  being  scientifically  organized. 
Governmental  forces  uniting  with  commercial  associations  to  promote  the 
business  of  different  sections  and  cities. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  go  into  the  details  of  the  booming  and  advertising 
with  which  much  of  this  competition  is  accompanied.  SuflSlce  to  say  that 
each  locality  is  putting  forth  every  effort  to  secure  its  full  share — and  a 
little  more — of  the  trade  of  the  country.  As  the  biggest  State  and  the  biggest 
City  of  them  all,  the  State  and  City  of  New  Y'ork  must  necessarily  meet  this 
competition  at  every  point  of  the  compass. 

It  has  been  computed  that  an  expenditure  of  $1,000,000,009  is  involved 
in  projected  port  improvements  throughout  the  world.  Boston,  Philadelphia, 
New  Orleans,  Montreal,  San  Francisco,  Seattle,  Los  Angeles  and  other  cities 
are  making  extensive  and  expensive  plans  for  new  terminal  facilities  so  as 
to  adapt  their  harbors  to  the  expanding  units  of  international  and  domestic 
commerce,  which  it  is  expected  is  to  be  vastly  increased  by  the  opening  of 
the  Panama  Canal.  New  York  City  should  spend  $60,000,000  in  harbor  and 
dock  improvements,  and  would  have  been  able  at  once  to  plan  on  that  scale 
of  development  if  she  had  not  taxed  her  resources  to  the  utmost  to  build 
subways. 

Now,  in  this  competition  of  section  with  section  and  city  with  city,  it  is 
important  for  us  to  consider  how  the  State  and  the  City  of  New  York  stand. 

We  cannot  escape  from  the  problems  which  this  competition  thrusts 
upon  us.  We  may  deplore  certain  features  of  it,  and  we  may  be  anxious  lest 
the  spirit  of  socialism  which  it  involves  may  work  harm.  But  we  must  rec- 
ognize that  on  the  whole  this  competition,  by  inspiring  new  civic  enterprise 
in  different  parts  of  the  country,  will,  in  the  final  results,  promote  the  pros- 
perity of  all  the  country. 

New  York  City's  Advantages 

We  in  New  Y'ork  have  held  our  own  very  well  during  the  past  ten  years 
or  so. 

Taking  the  figures  of  the  1910  census  and  comparing  them  with  those  of 
1900,  we  find  that  in  population  the  State  of  New  York  has  expanded  over 
25  per  cent  in  ten  years  against  21  per  cent  in  the  preceding  decade. 
She  has  grown  even  faster  than  the  country  as  a  whole,  and  now  holds  one- 
tenth  of  all  the  people  in  the  United  States. 

In  manufacturing  the  record  shows  that  while  in  1849  our  share  of  the 
total  industry  of  the  United  States  was  23.3  per  cent,  in  1910  it  was  16.3 
per  cent.  In  the  five  years  from  1904  to  1909  our  number  of  manufacturing 
establishments  increased  20  per  cent,  against  24.2  per  cent  in  the  country 
as  a  whole,  the  capital  invested  36.8  per  cent  against  45.4,  and  the  value  of 
products  35.4  per  cent  against  39.7.  While  this  shows  that  our  increase  is 
not  as  large  as  the  rest  of  the  countr)',  the  exhibit  is  after  all  gratifying 
because,  in  spite  of  the  tremendous  competition  to  which  we  are  subject  and 
the  enormous  economic  changes  which  are  constantly  going  on,  we  have  made 
important  gains. 

In  foreign  commerce  the  port  of  New  Y''ork,  in  the  fiscal  year  1912, 
enjoyed  46.99  per  cent  of  the  country's  total  against  46.12  per  cent  in  1911. 


106 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


The  ten-year  average,  however,  was  47,85  per  cent.  In  the  ten  years  from 
1902  to  1912  our  share  of  the  nation's  merchandise  imports  declined  from  61.9 
per  cent  to  59.0  per  cent,  and  of  merchandise  exports  its  share  increased 
from  35.5  to  37.4  per  cent.  So  we  are  holding  our  own  very  well  in  foreign 
commerce. 

Look  at  the  statistics  of  bank  clearings,  which  are  probably  the  best 
test  we  possess  of  the  volume  of  total  business  transactions.  In  1912  New 
York  State's  share  of  the  total  bank  clearings  of  the  United  States  was 
nearly  59  per  cent,  a  splendid  showing.  But  while  in  the  ten  years  from 
1902  to  1912  the  bank  clearings  in  the  City  of  New  York  increased  over  29 
per  cent,  the  gain  in  the  rest  of  the  country  was  over  74  per  cent.  This 
showing  is,  however,  complicated  by  the  effect  upon  the  figures  of  the  specu- 
lative depression  of  the  past  decade,  which  is  chiefly  felt  in  the  financial 
center. 

As  citizens  of  the  State  of  New  York  it  seems  to  me  that  we  should 
consider  carefully  the  significance  of  these  figures. 

How  to  Maintain  Leadership 

Now,  of  course,  we  don 't  want  in  the  State  of  New  York  a  monopoly 
of  the  commerce  and  trade  of  the  United  States;  nor  do  we  want  the  City 
of  New  York  to  become  a  great  anaconda  of  a  city,  throwing  its  power 
around  and  squeezing  the  life  out  of  the  rest  of  the  country.  We  believe  in 
the  motto,  "Live  and  let  live."  We  do  not  adopt  that  kind  of  competition 
that  uses  one 's  own  strength  to  destroy  others. 

But,  while  holding  this  spirit  of  good  will  toward  our  competitors,  it 
must  not  be  expected  that  we  are  going  to  stand  still  and  permit  our  God- 
given  advantages  of  commerce  to  be  snatched  away  by  them.  Our  problem 
is  not  to  make  war  upon  our  neighbors  but  to  defend  and  maintain  and  pro- 
mote the  supreme  interests  committed  to  our  hands. 

Thus  far  we  have  maintained  our  leadership  for  a  hundred  years.  That 
superiority  is  not  yet  threatened.  But  the  point  I  am  endeavoring  to  impress 
upon  your  minds  is  that  of  the  folly  and  danger  of  supposing  that  our  position 
is  impregnable  and  that  we  need  pay  no  attention  to  the  strenuous  endeavors 
of  our  sister  States  and  cities.  Even  Gibraltar  could  be  taken.  Every  busi- 
ness man  knows  that  the  moment  he  stops  striving  for  more  trade,  that 
moment  marks  the  beginning  of  his  decline.  What  is  true  of  individuals  is 
also  true  of  States  and  cities.  We  must  go  ahead  or  fall  behind.  There  is  no 
safety  in  standing  still. 

If  New  York  is  to  move  forward,  if  she  is  to  maintain  her  splendid  posi- 
tion of  commercial,  financial  and  industrial  leadership  in  this  country,  keep- 
ing pace  in  every  decade  with  the  material  progress  of  the  whole  country, 
then  it  is  imperative  that  every  interest  in  the  State  should  move  in  unison 
to  that  end.  We  should  strive  to  eliminate  every  vestige  of  offensive  section- 
alism within  the  State  

This  road  to  the  sea  is  the  Ambrose  Channel.  This  magnificent  road 
connecting  the  docks  of  the  City  with  the  deep  water  of  the  Atlantic  Ocean, 
is  40  feet  deep  at  mean  low  water  and  1,000  feet  wide.  It  is  as  much  a  thor- 
oughfare as  any  built  upon  land.  Its  limits  are  well  defined,  and  there  are 
trafiic  rules  to  govern  the  ships  that  may  pass  through  it.  This  is  the  broad 
avenue  to  the  sea  in  which  every  great  steamer  must  travel.  And  it  is  just 
as  important  to  the  farmer  in  Sullivan  or  Ulster  counties  that  there  should  be 
this  Ambrose  Channel  as  it  is  to  any  inhabitant  of  the  City.  If  that  channel 
were  closed  and  the  steamers  of  big  construction  were  thereby  prevented  from 
entering  New  York  Harbor,  there  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  whole  State  who 
would  not  suffer  loss.  The  blow  to  the  commerce  and  the  trade  of  the  State 
would  be  incalculable.  The  loss  would  be  a  National  calamity.  The  develop- 
ment of  the  port  and  terminal  facilities  of  the  City  of  New  York  is  as  much 
the  interest  of  the  interior  of  the  State  as  it  is  of  Manhattan  Island. — Ex- 
tracts from  a  speech  by  Sereno  S.  Pratt  (Secretary  of  the  New  York  Chamber 
of  Commerce),  before  The  New  York  Waterways  Association,  Oct.  31,  1913. 


107 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


(Note  28) 

New  York's  Growth  Depends  Upon  Its  Commerce 

The  growth  of  the  City  of  New  York  depends  almost  entirely  upon  com- 
merce, including  manufactures,  and  the  people  who  conduct  such  commerce 
and  manufactures  constitute  on  the  one  hand  a  steady  and  increasing  market 
for  the  products  of  the  State,  and  on  the  other  hand,  supply  the  force  which, 
through  the  exercise  of  skill,  invention,  thought  and  activity,  sends  into  the 
non-urban  portion  of  the  State  an  increasing  number  of  variety  of  manu- 
factured products  and  appliances,  to  minister  to  the  necessity,  the  comfort 
and  the  luxury  of  those  who  pay  for  such  necessities,  comforts  and  luxuries 
by  the  products  of  the  soil  

New  York  City  must  either  continue  to  expand  or  commence  to  contract. 
It  cannot  continue  to  expand  unless  occupation  is  provided  for  those  who 
are  to  come,  and  occupation  is  almost  absolutely  dependent  upon  transporta- 
tion. This  question  of  transportation  is  divided  into  questions  of  land  and 
water  transportation,  and  the  question  of  water  transportation  is  again  di- 
vided into  those  of  trans- Atlantic,  coastal  and  inland.  There  is  no  desire  to 
minimize  or  overlook  the  importance  of  any  of  these  branches;  but  the  point 
is,  that  all  of  these  facilities  may  be  constantly  improved  to  meet  the  con- 
stantly increasing  requirements  of  the  constantly  increasing  population;  and, 
unless  it  is  done,  the  City  loses  value  as  a  market  for  the  products  of  the 
country,  and  loses  efficiency  as  a  producer  of  improved  and  manufactured 
products. — From  paper  by  Ex-Congressman  William  Stiles  Bennet,  read  before 
the  New  York  Waterways  Association,  Oct.  30,  1913, 


(Note  29) 

"Subsidizing  Foreign  Steamships" 

MR.  SILLECK  (Brooklyn):  I  don't  want  this  Convention  to  go  home 
with  the  idea  that  New  York  City  is  a  sleepy  town  and  behind  the  times. 
We  have  located  down  there  the  John  M.  Robbins  Dry  Dock  and  Repair 
Yard,  a  corporation  capitalized  at  $10,000,000,  and  to  my  certain  knowledge 
for  the  last  five  years  they  have  been  trying  to  make  connection  with  the 
various  steamships,  that  if  they  would  agree  to  give  them  a  thousand-foot 
dry  dock  and  a  sufficient  amount  of  business  annually,  they  would  build  that 
dock.  And  they  are  ready  to-day,  with  the  Clyde  interests  behind  them,  to 
make  that  proposition  good,  but  the  foreign  steamships  in  New  York  Harbor 
have  for  years  and  years  had  their  docking  facilities  for  a  great  deal  less  than 
cost.   They  are  renting  the  Chelsea  piers  at  about  2  per  cent  of  cost. 

The  State  is  spending  $140,000,000  to  build  a  Barge  Canal;  the  United 
States  Government  is  spending  $200,000,000  for  the  Panama  Canal,  and  the 
larger  per  cent  of  that  business  will  center  in  New  York  Harbor,  and  why 
New  York  City,  or  New  York  City's  interests  should  sell  the  dockage  privi- 
lege to  foreign  steamship  company  at  less  than  cost,  in  other  words,  prac- 
tically subsidizing  foreign  steamships  to  come  into  our  harbor  and  do  its 
business,  we  can't  understand.  New  York's  foreign  commerce  is  over  $2,- 
000,000,000  annually.  The  foreign  commerce  of  Boston  is  inside  of  $200,- 
000,000  and  the  great  steamships  like  the  eight  or  nine  hundred  foot  vessels 
would  have  to  lay  up  in  Boston  three  or  four  weeks  to  get  a  cargo,  and  they 
could  get  a  cargo  every  twenty-four  hours  in  New  York. 

But  we  have  live,  active  business  men  who  are  ready  to  do  business  the 
world  over  and  will  invest  tliree  or  four  or  five  or  ten  million  dollars  to 
build  docks,  but  they  will  not  sell  that  product  at  less  than  cost,  and  I,  as  a 
citizen  of  the  City  of  New  York  and  a  taxpayer  of  the  City  of  New  York, 
do  object  most  decidedly  to  spending  public  money  and  then  subsidize  for- 
eign steamships  which  carry  freight  out  and  into  our  great  harbor. — From 
proceedings  of  the  New  York  State  Waterways  Association,  Oct.  31,  1913. 


108 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  30) 

Why  Trade  is  Diverted  to  Competing  Ports 

That  the  waterfront  problem  of  Manhattan  requires  a  remedy  is  strik- 
ingly shown  in  the  Eej)ort  of  the  Xew  York  Commerce  Commission  in  1900. 
Of  the  11  miles  of  frontage  adjacent  to  the  commercial  sections  of  the  Island, 
only  1^2  miles  are  available  for  foreign  steamships,  and  a  similar  amount  for 
the  coastwise,  river  and  Sound  traffic.  On  the  other  hand,  the  railroads,  ex- 
clusive of  ferries,  utilize  nearly  2\i>  miles  of  this  limited  frontage,  with  a 
constantly  increasing  demand  for  more.  The  result  of  this  inadequate  pro- 
vision for  water-borne  commerce  is  the  diversion  of  trade  to  competing  ports, 
and  to  the  outlying  jjortions  of  the  Port  of  New  York,  from  which  the  cost  of 
cartage  to  Manhattan  is  excessive. 

That  conditions  are  growing  no  better  is  shown  by  recent  complaints  by 
commercial  interests  of  dwindling  profits  in,  for  instance,  the  tea  trade,  caused 
by  the  inability  of  ships  plying  between  this  Port  and  the  Orient  to  find  space 
for  unloading  their  valuable  cargoes,  and  their  consequent  banishment  to 
Staten  Island,  from  whence  the  extra  cost  of  cartage  is  stated  to  be  $2.20 
per  ton. 

Perhaps  the  best  evidence  of  unsatisfied  demands  for  piers  is  the  com- 
petition of  both  rail  and  water  carriers  for  a  space  that  is  insufficient  for  the 
use  of  all.  In  fact,  these  ol)jectionable  conditions  will  be  intensified  if  the 
final  solution  of  the  West  Side  problem  of  the  Xew  York  Central  &  Hudson 
River  Railroad  is  accomplished  in  a  way  that  will  necessitate  the  acquisition 
by  that  company  of  additional  piers  in  the  vicinity  of  St.  John's  Park  to 
replace  the  existing  inland  facilities. 

It  therefore  seenis  proper  to  conclude  that  there  is  an  urgent  demaud 
for  some  remedy  that  will  minimize  the  need  of  the  railroads  for  this  expen- 
sive and  restricted  waterfront  for  the  trans-shipment  of  freight  between  ear 
and  truck,  so  that  this  space  may  be  devoted  to  the  expanding  needs  of  the 
water  carriers. — From  Brief  of  Amsterdam  Corporation,  by  William  J.  Wilgus 
(formerly  Vice-President  of  the  New  York  Central  &  Hudson  River  Railroad). 


<Note  31) 

More  than  Thirty  Applications  on  File 

The  New  York  City  Dock  Department  has  stated  that  more  than  thirty 
applications  for  docking  accommodations  are  on  file  which  cannot  be  accom- 
modated. Our  neighboring  seaports  are  fully  alive  to  the  fact  that  New  York 
has  failed  to  keep  pace  with  the  demand  of  Its  docks,  and  this  condition  will 
be  greatly  accentuated  when  the  increased  commerce  seeks  Atlantic  Coast 
ports  on  the  opening  of  the  Panama  Canal.  .  .  .  — From  X"ew  Jersey  Harbor 
Commission,  -Ith  Preliminary  Report,  B.  F.  Cresson,  Jr.,  Chief  Engineer. 

(Note  32) 

An  Expensive  Port  to  Get  Commerce  Through 

Certain  sections  of  Xew  York  Harbor  have  become  intensely  congested, 
while  other  portions,  with  great  commercial  possibilities,  have  remained  unde- 
veloped. The  private  interests  have  acquired,  by  purchase  or  lease,  the  best 
localities  in  the  harbor,  and,  in  the  absence  of  any  general  authority,  have 
planned  their  terminals  for  individual  needs,  which  were  often  not  for  the 
benefit  of  the  port  as  a  whole.  It  has  been  aptly  said  that  while  New  York 
is  one  of  the  cheapest  ports  to  get  commerce  into,  it  is  one  of  the  most  expen- 
sive ports  to  get  commerce  through. 

It  was  generally  recognized  that  the  authorities  in  Xew  York  Harbor 
must  take  some  definite  action  looking  toward  the  expansion  of  port  facili- 
ties, if  the  Port  of  New  York  was  not  to  lose  some  of  its  natural  commerce  to 
such  ports  as  Philadelphia  and  Boston,  which  have  adopted  general  develop- 
ment policies  and  are  building  along  the  lines  of  a  comprehensive  plan  and  on 
a  carefully  worked  out  program. — From  Xew  Jersey  Harbor  Commission,  4th 
Preliminary  Report. 


109 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


(Note  33) 

The  Prohibitive  Prices  of  Hudson  River  Frontage 

In  the  condemnation  proceedings  by  the  Tunnel  Company  against  the 
D.,  L.  &  W.  R.R.,  Mr.  Caldwell,  the  Vice-President  and  Traffic  Manager  of 
the  D.,  L.  &  W.  R.R.,  testified  that  when  the  peculiar  traditional  prejudice 
should  be  overcome,  there  was  no  reason  why  the  New  Jersey  shore  should 
not  be  as  valuable  or  more  valuable  than  the  New  York  shore.  He  stated 
that  their  terminal  facilities  on  the  New  Jersey  shore  were  so  limited  that  if 
the  D.,  L.  &  W.  R.R.  were  deprived  of  theirs  they  did  not  know  where  to  dupli- 
cate them,  and  that  to  duplicate  them  or  supply  them  in  any  degree  would  be 
prohibitive  in  price. 

The  point  of  this  is  that  the  New  Jersey  shore  between  Fort  Lee  and 
Weehawken  will  in  time  be  used  for  direct  communication  between  railroad 
and  steamship  and  be  immensely  valuable.  The  value  now  of  waterfront 
property  on  the  Hudson  River  from  Castle  Point  down  is  probably  not  less 
than  $2,500.00  per  foot. 

In  Baltimore  all  the  vessels  go  to  the  railroad  piers  and  the  piers  are 
built  for  this  purpose. 

Mr.  A.  P.  BoUer,  an  engineer  testifying  in  this  case,  says  that  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  get  waterfront  on  the  Hudson  River  except  at  prohibitive  prices. 

Mr.  Ingersoll,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  New  York,  New  Haven  &  Hartford 
Railroad  Company,  testified  that  the  waterfront  lands  on  the  Hudson  River 
were  becoming  so  valuable  that  the  classification  yards  and  territory  for  all 
purposes,  where  it  could  be  secured,  was  being  done  west  of  the  Jersey  City 
hills,  because  the  waterfront  lands  were  too  valuable. 

Mr.  Truesdale,  President  of  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western  Rail- 
road Company,  testified  that  the  reason  they  were  going  out  on  the  meadows 
with  their  classification  yards  was  because  land  on  the  tide  water  was  so 
scarce  and  so  valuable  that  it  was  not  good  business  now  to  devote  them  to 
such  a  purpose. — From  New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission,  4th  Preliminary 
Report. 

(Note  34) 

Transportation  Adds  To  the  Cost  of  Commodities 

There  is  probably  nothing  that  adds  so  much  to  the  cost  of  commodities 
as  the  cost  of  transporting  them  between  the  manufacturer  and  the  consumer. 

The  terminals  of  the  transportation  systems,  both  rail  and  water,  are  tne 
expensive  parts  of  the  systems,  and,  as  a  general  rule,  limit  the  amount  of 
freight  that  can  be  handled  by  the  carrier.  The  seaports  are  the  points  where 
land  and  water  transportation  meet,  and  where  commodities  are  passed  from 
one  form  of  carrier  to  another,  and  it  is  the  facilities  for  transshipment  that 
determine  the  quality  of  the  port.— From  New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission, 
4th  Preliminary  Report. 

(Note  35) 

Increase  in  Commerce  without  Proportionate  Increase  in 

Wharfage 

From  the  foregoing  tables*  it  will  be  seen  that  there  has  been  an  increase 
of  50.27  per  cent  in  the  tonnage  of  vessels  entering  the  Port  of  New  York 
from  foreign  countries  during  the  past  ten  years,  and  that  there  has  been  an 
increase  of  50.25  in  the  value  of  the  goods  that  entered  and  left  the  Port  of 
New  York  in  foreign  trade,  which  indicates  a  healthy  and  progressive  growth. 

It  should  be  said,  however,  that  during  the  ten  years  between  1898  and 
1907,  the  latest  ten-year  period  for  which  figures  are  at  hand,  that  while  the 
growth  of  tonnage  at  London  was  but  18  per  cent,  that  at  Liverpool  was  32 
Hamburg's  increase  during  the  same  period  was  55,  Antwerp's  was  63  and 

•  Tables  not  here  reproduced. 


110 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


Rotterdam's  was  65  per  cent,  so  that  in  the  percentage  of  growth  New  York 
is  by  no  means  in  the  lead  among  the  great  ports  of  the  world,  although  well 
in  the  lead  in  all  of  the  potentials. 

Gratified  as  we  may  be,  therefore,  with  the  growth  of  New  York,  as  a 
port,  and  as  to  the  tonnage  entering  and  leaving  its  docks  for  the  foreign 
trade,  if  it  is  to  equal  its  great  rivals  in  Europe  there  is  need  for  better 
facilities  and  a  larger  growth. 


The  growth  of  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York  has  suf- 
fered vicissitudes,  however,  and  their  character  but  serve  to  emphasize  the 
present  healthy  and  remarkable  growth.  There  was  no  increase  in  the  for- 
eign commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York  between  the  years  1880  and  1898; 
during  that  period  its  average  annual  value  was  $832,014,727,  substantially 
less  in  amount  than  in  either  the  year  1880  or  1898,  But,  comparing  the 
past  year  with  the  year  1898,  the  increase  has  been  87  per  cent;  and  the 
average  annual  value  of  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York  from 
1898  to  1910,  inclusive,  a  period  of  twelve  years,  has  been  $1,225,921,104. 

As  bearing  upon  the  subject  of  terminals,  we  have  seen  that  there  has 
been  an  increase  in  the  foreign  trade  of  the  Port  of  New  York  of  87  per 
cent  since  1898.  We  are  informed  by  the  Commissioner  of  Docks  and  Fer- 
ries of  the  City  of  New  York,  that,  since  1898,  the  increase  in  the  wharfage 
accommodations  of  the  City  has  been  but  22.6  per  cent,  of  which  there  was 
an  increase  of  15.7  per  cent  in  the  City's  piers,  and  an  increase  of  6.9  per 
cent  in  the  privately  owned  piers.  We  append  the  following,  from  Chief  En- 
gineer Charles  W.  Staniford,  of  the  Department  of  Docks  and  Ferries  of  the 
City  of  New  York,  under  date  of  November  3,  1910: 

Increased  wharfage  room  in  the  City  Of  New  York  during  past  ten  and 
one-half  years: 


Year.  Linear  Feet. 

1900  Net  increase    16,021 

1901  Net  increase    15,513 

1902  Net  increase    20,675 

1903  Net  increase    11,432 

1904  Net  increase    18,719 

1905  Net  increase    7,576 

1906  Net  increase    38,741 

1907  Net  increase    11,358 

1908  Net  increase    9,158 

1909  Net  increase    7,951 

1910  Net  increase  (%  year)   3,208 


While  this  increase  in  wharfage  room,  says  Mr.  Staniford,  does  not 
approximate  in  proportion  the  increase  in  foreign  and  domestic  com- 
merce, it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  since  1900  the  waterfront,  particu- 
larly in  the  Borough  of  Manhattan,  has  been  modernized  to  such  an  extent 
as  to  permit  the  handling  of  freight  in  a  more  expeditious  manner  than 
heretofore.  It  may  be  stated  that  there  is  very  little  available  water- 
front left  in  the  Borough  of  Manhattan  which  will  admit  of  improvement 
and,  in  order  to  meet  the  increased  requirements  the  Commissioner  of 
Docks  is  outlining  a  plan  for  various  terminal  stations  whereby  freight 
can  be  handled  from  piers  in  the  vicinity  of  these  stations,  and  then 
transport  it  overland  to  the  terminals  for  distribution. 

In  the  meantime,  it  is  contemplated  to  provide  wharfage  accommoda- 
tions over  that  area  of  waterfront  in  South  Brooklyn,  where  piers  of  a 
length  of  1,000  to  1,800  feet  can  be  constructed,  in  addition  to  which  a 
sufficient  amount  of  upland  is  available  for  the  erection  of  a  terminal  if 
necessary. 

We  regard  this  matter  of  a  sufficiency  of  wharfage  at  the  Port  of  New 
York  as  vital.  From  Chief  Engineer  Staniford 's  statement  before  us,  it  is 
apparent  that,  in  the  reorganization  of  the  wharfage  of  Manhattan,  on  both 


111 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 


the  East  and  Hudson  rivers,  much  has  been  accomplished.  We  have  seen, 
too,  however,  that  the  increased  dockage,  as  a  whole,  has  not  kept  pace  with 
the  increased  commerce. 


The  point  that  this  Commission  wishes  to  make  here  is:  if,  at  the  end 
of  a  period  of  stagnation  in  the  growth  of  New  York's  foreign  commerce, 
extending  over  eighteen  years,  there  was  such  a  serious  lack  of  sufficient 
wharfage  as  to  force  steamship  lines  to  other  ports  to  secure  the  accommoda- 
tions they  required,  as  testified  by  the  President  of  the  Dock  Board  in  1899, 
what  can  the  condition  be  now,  twelve  years  later,  when  there  has  been  an 
increase  of  87  per  cent  in  the  foreign  commerce  of  the  Port,  as  well  as  a  very 
large  increase  in  the  coastwise  and  local  traffic  besides?  With  but  23  per 
cent  of  increased  wharfage  during  that  period,  inclusive  of  the  very  large 
and  costly  works  to  which  we  have  referred  above,  manifestly  the  congestion 
of  traffic  along  the  most  desirable  and  most  useful  waterfront  of  the  City  of 
New  York  must  at  the  present  time  be  acute,  and  extremely  ominous.*  That 
this  is  true  is  to  some  extent  shown  in  the  very  commendable  efforts  that  the 
present  administration  is  making  to  readjust  and  rearrange  matters,  at  a  cost 
on  the  west  side  of  Manhattan  alone  involving  an  expenditure  of  approxi- 
mately $100,000,000,  besides  other  very  large  undertakings  in  Brooklyn,  that 
would  be  extremely  costly. — From  Barge  Canal  Terminal  Commission  Report, 
Vol.  I  (1911). 

*  Our  own  flg-ures,  bringing  these  totals  up  to  January  1,  1914,  slightly 
alter  the  above  calculations,  and  serve  to  emphasize  the  conclusions  drawn 
by  the  Barge  Canal  Terminal  Commission. 

According  to  figures  supplied  hy  the  Department  of  Docks  and  Ferries  the 
present  total  wharfage  of  New  Yorl^  City,  measured  around  the  ends  of  piers,  is 
approximately  224  miles  (1,182.720  linear  feet)  and  the  net  increase  from  1899  to 
1913.  inclusive,  is  212,160  linear  feet.  This  would  indicate  an  increase  of  but  22% 
in  fifteen  years. 

According  to  the  United  States  Department  of  Commerce,  the  total  foreign 
commerce  of  the  Port  of  New  York  increased  from  $847,796,844  in  1898  to  $1,966,- 
256,617  in  1913;  an  increase  of  131%. 

(Note  36)  Progressive  Foreign  Harbor  Policy 

Striking  Features  of  Design  and  Construction. — The  striking  features  of 
British  and  Continental  construction  are  permanence  and  continuity  of  pur- 
pose. Though  the  work  may  be  carried  on  over  a  large  time  area,  the  whole 
is  the  result  of  a  complete  original  plan  or  leading  idea  carried  out  by  sec- 
tions as  the  demands  of  the  business  warrant.  Time  is  taken  to  carefully 
consider  and  prepare  complete  plans. 

In  the  later  development  of  modern  ports  no  small  attention  has  been 
given  to  the  artistic  effect  of  the  completed  scheme.  In  many  cases  it  has 
been  possible  to  provide  recreation  areas,  in  the  shape  of  broad  and  spacious 
promenades  for  the  people,  without  in  any  way  interfering  with  efficiency. 

Provision  for  the  Future. — Designs  are  made  with  a  view  to  future  exten- 
sions. The  more  successful  ports — as  Liverpool,  Hamburg  and  Antwerp — 
with  courage  and  confidence  in  the  future,  provide  for  anticipated  trade.  As 
a  result  they  are  the  leaders  in  progress. 

Designs  are  made  with  a  view  to  future  extension. 

The  more  successful  ports  keep  their  development  ahead  of  the  demand 
and  so  capture  the  trade  when  it  comes. 

Antwerp  has  embarked  at  this  moment  on  a  further  port  extension 
scheme,  definitely  laid  down  and  sanctioned  by  Parliament,  into  which  is  to  go 
$60,000,000. — From  Report  of  Harbor  Commissioners  of  Montreal  (1908). 

(Note  37)      Farsighted  Methods  of  Two  Great  Ports 

Liverpool 

The  dues  and  charges  in  this  port  are  very  high,  but  since  this  is  the  com- 
mon practice  all  over  Britain,  it  is  a  difficulty  the  shipper  and  merchant  can- 
not evade.    It  is  established  custom.    The  general  Government  practically 


112 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


turns  over  its  powers  to  the  port.  It  neither  lights  nor  buoys  nor  dredges 
the  harbor  or  channel  out  to  sea.  All  the  prodigious  work  of  making  a  port 
in  the  teeth  of  a  tidal  range  of  31  feet,  and  the  silting  of  the  estuary,  and  the 
shifting  sands  on  the  submerged  delta,  has  fallen  upon  this  unaided  corpora- 
tion. Not  a  dollar  has  come  from  Government  nor  from  the  City.  By  the 
method  of  selection  the  members  of  the  Board  are  the  most  alert  and  able 
business  men  of  the  region.  Men  whose  daily  lives  are  devoted  to  business 
which  is  dependent  upon  the  administration  of  the  port,  and  whose  business 
success  is  part  of  the  success  of  the  port  management.  On  every  hand  in 
Liverpool  one  hears  the  highest  praise  of  the  Board.  In  business  it  is  consid- 
ered the  highest  honor  a  man  may  earn  to  be  given  a  seat  on  the  Board.  One 
gentleman  described  the  honor  as  so  much  coveted  that  a  well-advised  young 
man  would  shape  every  act  from  his  first  day  in  the  business  world  with  refer- 
ence to  this  possible  future  goal.  Though  no  remuneration  of  any  kind  is 
given  for  service,  there  is  seldom  a  vacant  seat  at  the  weekly  meetings  of  the 
Board. 

The  paid  officials  are  of  the  highest  type.  The  position  of  general  man- 
ager is  as  responsible  as  the  presidency  of  one  of  our  greatest  railways,  and 
requires  as  rare  ability.  The  chief  engineer  has  problems  as  difficult  to  handle 
as  are  met  with  in  the  science.  Such  able  men,  tried  and  proved,  hold  their 
positions  indefinitely,  at  the  pleasure  of  the  Board. 

The  present  general  manager.  Miles  Kirk  Burton,  Esq.,  a  man  of  superb 
efficiency,  has  held  his  position  for  a  generation.  The  chief  engineer,  Anthony 
George  Lyster,  Esq.,  a  man  of  the  highest  ability,  grew  up  in  the  problems  of 
the  harbor,  his  father  before  him  being  chief  engineer  for  a  long  term  of 
years. 


Liverpool  is  the  home  port  of  the  great  Cunarders,  Maiiretania  and  Lii.si- 
tania.  There  are  only  three  or  four  ports  in  the  world  that  can  take  boats 
of  this  size,  and  yet  the  far-sighted  gentlemen  of  the  Mersey  Docks  and  Har- 
bour Board  see  plainly  that  there  will  be  larger  boats  yet.  And  as  an  illus- 
tration of  the  simplicity  and  freedom  of  the  organization  of  such  a  board, 
it  wiU  be  instructive  to  see  how  easily  a  great  improvement  is  undertaken. 
Discussing  the  growth  of  commerce,  the  need  of  a  larger  dock  was  seen.  The 
engineer  provided  plans  and  estimates,  which  after  mature  deliberation  were 
approved,  and  witliout  asking  the  permission  or  approval  or  support  of  any- 
body, except  a  Parliamentary  permit  for  general  harbor  improvement,  an 
extension  was  voted  April  30,  1907,  to  provide  a  dock  with  berths  for  four 
ships  at  once,  with  lengths  up  to  1,100  feet,  and  120  feet  beam;  and  with 
quays,  sheds,  railway  tracks,  and  driveways  accompanying — involving  an 
expenditure  of  $16,000,000.  So  when  the  larger  ships  arrive,  Liverpool  will 
have  room  and  welcome  for  them. 

Antwerp 

Antwerp  illustrates,  as  well  as  any  port  that  can  be  named,  the  fact 
shown  in  various  lands,  that  in  proportion  as  good  harbor  facilities  are  pro- 
vided the  traffic  of  the  port  and  country  have  expanded.  "It  is  an  invariable 
rule  that  harbor  development  on  modern  lines  is  immediately  followed  by  new 
shipping  and  increased  trade."  (Stephens.) 


So  the  City  has,  after  mature  consideration,  planned  a  marvelous  great 
harbor  extension,  which,  if  carried  out  in  full,  will  make  the  Harbor  of  Ant- 
werp the  finest  in  the  world.  The  docks  and  basins  of  the  harbor  are  now 
at  the  north  or  down-stream  end  of  the  town,  where  the  river  bends  sharply 
to  the  west.  There  are  now  nine  docks  connected  by  locks  clustered  around 
this  bend.  The  ninth  and  farthest  north  is  the  first  stage  in  the  new  exten- 
sion (Fig.  13,  p.  55).  The  plan  is  ultimately  to  provide  a  new  channel  for 
the  river  for  five  miles  to  the  northwest,  making  a  continuation  of  the  broad 
curve  which  approaches  the  City  from  the  south,  and  cutting  off  seven  miles 
of  the  present  river  which  extends  west  of  the  present  docks.  This  will 
remove  two  very  sharp  curves  in  the  channel  and  will  provide  a  tideless 


113 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


basin  six  miles  long  for  an  anchorage.  The  great  dock  system  will  lie  to  the 
northeast  of  the  new  channel,  and  parallel  with  it,  and  will  consist  of  a  chan- 
nel 750  feet  wide  and  four  and  live-eighths  miles  in  length,  connecting  with 
the  river  by  a  lock  at  the  northwest  or  down-stream  end.  Opening  off  from 
this  channel  to  the  eastward  are  nine  slips  600  feet  wide  by  about  4,000  feet 
long,  to  be  lined  on  each  side  by  sheds  and  railway  tracks.  There  will  be 
three  turning  basins  of  1,300  feet  diameter  placed  about  a  mile  and  a  half 
apart,  and  at  the  western  end  a  turning  basin  of  about  1,600  feet  diameter. 
Land  has  been  reserved  all  around  this  extension  for  railway  trackage  and 
warehousing,  and  running  completely  round  the  docks,  and  through  the  reser- 
vation a  grand  boulevard  and  pleasure  drive  will  be  built.  The  land  reserved 
for  this  extension  is  five  miles  long  and  2i/i>  miles  at  the  widest,  and  has  an 
area  of  over  eight  square  miles.  The  first  half  mile  of  this  new  dock  system 
is  already  in  commission,  and  though  not  quite  finished,  it  is  crowded  with 
ships  and  barges,  serving  to  its  limit  even  before  sheds  and  tracks  can  be 
supplied.  It  is  the  plan  now  to  begin  construction  on  the  next  section,  con- 
sisting of  two  slips  and  a  turning  basin,  just  as  soon  as  this  first  section  is 
completed. 

It  is  estimated  that  the  entire  group  of  new  docks  will  cost  $55,000,000, 
exclusive  of  the  river  diversion,  and  will  give  Antwerp  a  total  of  38  miles  of 
quay,  and  five  miles  of  quiet  anchorage  in  the  old  bed  of  the  Schelde. — From 
Report  of  Chicago  Harbor  Commission,  1909. 

(Note  38)  Overcoming  Obstacles  Abroad 

The  Port  of  London 

.  .  .  The  very  causes  that  led  to  London's  one-time  supremacy 
finally  led  to  her  downfall,  in  the  matter  of  commercial  and  maritime  su- 
premacy. So  long  had  she  reigned  in  the  world  of  shipping  and  transship- 
ping, that  she  became  old,  and  her  docks  and  warehouses  and  her  facilities 
became  antiquated,  while  her  new-old  rivals,  .  .  .  took  the  lead  in  mod- 
ernizing their  ports  and  in  recapturing  the  trade  that  they  had  lost  three  cen- 
turies ago.  .  .  .  If  it  shall  be  that  London,  which  has  but  just  fallen 
from  her  exalted  first  rank,  shall  reassert  herself,  devoting  her  energies  and 
her  resources  to  such  improvements  in  her  port  as  the  magnitude  of  its  neces- 
sities justify,  it  wovild  not  require  a  prophet  to  forecast  the  sequel.* 

*  Announcement  was  made  in  the  press,  January  27,  1911,  that  the  Port  of 
London  authority  is  about  to  undertake  improvements  in  the  Thames  from  Lon- 
don Bridg-e  to  Tilbiiry,  in  the  construction  of  new  basins  with  an  aggregate  area 
of  329  acres  all  told  and  tlie  enlarg-ement  of  existing:  basins,  all  at  an  expense  of 
about  $70,000,000. 


The  Port  of  Liverpool 

Liverpool  is  the  second  largest  port  of  Great  Britain  and  has  for  genera- 
tions been  notable  for  the  ability  and  efficiency  of  its  management.  The 
Mersey  Docks  and  Harbor  Board,  created  by  Act  of  Parliament  in  1857,  is 
regarded  as  the  most  successful  board,  from  every  point  of  view,  that  is  in 
control  of  a  British  port.  The  method  of  electing  members  to  it  and  the 
composition  of  the  membership  has  long  been  regarded  as  the  British  stand- 
ard. No  obstacles  seem  too  great  for  it  to  overcome,  nor  any  undertaking 
too  costly  if  it  is  the  judgment  of  the  Board  that  Liverpool  requires  it.  It 
has  always  been  in  the  lead  in  its  ability  to  accommodate  any  vessel,  whatever 
her  size,  and  in  this  respect  her  facilities  have  always  been  ahead  of  the 
demand. 


Explaining  and  discussing  the  tremendous  new  work  under  way  at  Ant- 
werp, Mr.  Desmond  Fitzgerald,  of  Boston,  who  was  greatly  impressed  with 
the  extent  and  character  of  the  work,  no  less  than  with  the  rapid  growth  of 
the  Port's  traffic,  in  part  says: 


114 


THE  STATISTICAL 


APPENDIX 


'*It  may  be  foolish  to  spend  the  time  in  designing  such  an  ambitious 
scheme,  which  may  be  greatly  modified  as  conditions  change,  or,  in  fact, 
which  may  never  be  built  at  all.  But  a  little  reflection  will,  I  think, 
show  that  this  is  not  the  case.  Engineers  who  have  charge  of  the  devel- 
opment of  large  dock  systems  have  learned  by  experience  the  great  cost 
of  acquiring  property  for  building  new  works  where  the  land  has  not 
previously  been  set  aside  for  that  purpose.  They  have  also  learned  that 
however  large  the  scale  on  which  they  have  built  in  the  past,  business  has 
outstripped  their  caution,  with  the  result  that  systems  developed  by  piece- 
meal have  lacked  harmony  and  efficiency.  Besides  these  considerations, 
there  is  always  a  keen  rivalry  between  the  different  ports  competing  for 
the  world 's  commerce,  and  it  wouM  not  look  well  for  any  of  the  ports  to 
be  behind  the  others  in  its  plans  for  the  future.  Thus  we  find  at  Havre, 
Antwerp,  Bremen,  Eotterdam  and  Hamburg  very  large  plans  to  provide 
for  the  growth  of  trade." 

The  same  is  true  of  the  Port  of  Liverpool,  which  so  steadily  advances  in 
its  new  construction  work  as  not  to  be  compelled  to  undertake  very  large 
enterprises  at  one  time;  and  there  is  but  little  doubt  that  London  is  on  the 
eve  of  larger  developments  under  its  new  Port  authority.  With  all  of  these 
the  Port  of  Antwerp  is  not  only  holding  its  own,  but  is  valiantly  at  work 
providing  extensions  that  shall  meet  every  possible  requirement,  and  in  this 
the  State  is  backing  up  the  Port  without  stint.  If  the  planning  and  providing 
of  the  amplest  facilities,  in  the  way  of  basins,  quays,  sheds,  warehouses, 
cranes,  rail  connections  and  connections  between  inland  and  ocean-going  car- 
riers, at  the  minimum  of  cost  to  the  users,  can  make  of  Antwerp  the  first 
port  of  the  world,  the  people  of  that  city  and  the  people  of  Belgium  will 
spare  no  expense  to  provide  them.  It  may  well  be  said  that  the  Belgians  are 
a  wonderful  people. 

The  Port  of  Hamburg 

Hamburg  is  the  greatest  seaport  of  Europe.  In  many  respects  it  is  the 
greatest  port  in  the  world.  In  respect  to  the  tonnage  entering  it,  and  the 
goods  transshipped  at  its  wharves,  it  is  only  exceeded  by  the  Port  of  New 
York,  But  the  distinction  between  Hamburg  and  New  York  is  most  marked. 
The  State  of  Hamburg  carved  out  of  the  river  Elbe,  some  sixty-five  miles 
from  the  sea,  in  a  river  of  shifting  sands  and  unreliable  channel,  a  mag- 
nificent port,  available  for  the  greatest  ships  that  float,  with  splendid  wharves, 
unequalled  warehouses,  ample  sheds,  an  array  of  cranes  for  the  expeditious 
loading  and  discharging  of  vessels  that  are  more  numerous  than  is  to  be 
found  anywhere  else  in  the  world,  and  the  most  efiicient  rail  connections  with 
all  of  its  wharves  and  the  interior  of  EuiO})e. 

What  Hamburg  has  achieved  has  been  through  the  indomitable  determi- 
nation of  a  patriotic,  a  wise  and  keenly  interested  citizenship.  Hamburg  has 
but  to  know  the  need  in  a  matter  of  harbor  development  in  order  to  furnish 
it.  It  has  done  everything  for  itself,  nature  having  done  almost  nothing. 
It  is  these  facts  that  command  for  Hamburg  the  admiration  of  the  entire 
world — because  of  her  incomparable  port  development  in  the  face  of  seem- 
ingly irremediable  adverse  conditions. — From  Report  of  Barge  Canal  Terminal 
Commission  (1911). 


(Note  39) 

The  Financial  Situation 

The  amount  of  money  represented  by  modern  port  development,  as  near 
as  can  possibly  be  ascertained,  is  as  follows: 

London    $186,700,000 

Liverpool    125,000,000 

Manchester    90,000,000 

Glasgow    40,000,000 

Newcastle    80,000,000 


115 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


Bristol    30,000,000 

Cardifif    30,000,000 

Antwerp    45,000,000 

Hamburg    100,000,000 

Rotterdam    33,000,000 

Marseille    29,500,000 

Havre    24,000,000 

Montreal    10,000,000 

The  rate  of  interest  paid  by  the  port  authorities  on  the  money  borrowed, 
sanctioned  by  corporation  or  State,  varies  from  2 14  to  4:%  per  cent. — From 
Report  of  Harbor  Commissioners  of  Montreal,  1908. 


(Note  40) 

Why  New  York  City  Should  Have  a  Free  Port 

(Address  of  William  Harris  Douglas  at  the  hearing  given  by  the  Foreign 
Trade  Committee  of  the  Merchants'  Association,  May  14,  1914) 

At  the  request  of  our  Chairman,  Mr.  Fuller,  and  on  behalf  of  the  Foreign 
Trade  Committee  of  the  Merchants'  Association,  I  have  been  requested  to 
make  a  short  statement  in  regard  to  ''Free  Ports,"  what  has  been  accom- 
plished by  others  in  the  past  and  what  it  is  possible  New  York  City  might 
do  for  its  own  commercial  advancement,  if  we  should  be  able  to  establish 
a  free  zone  along  new  and  improved  m.ethods,  based  on  the  experience  of 
others. 

The  "Free  Port"  or  ''Free  Zone"  idea  is  generations  old.  At  first 
it  merely  meant  that  a  seaport  or  inland  city  desiring  to  increase  its  im- 
portance and  attract  business — in  the  one  case  shipping  and  merchandise 
combined,  and  in  the  case  of  inland  places  the  trade  of  the  surrounding 
territory  and  adjacent  countries — allowed  merchandise  of  all  kinds  to  enter 
unrestricted,  without  payment  of  duty,  and  sales  could  be  made  without 
taxation  in  the  public  market  places;  but  beyond  what  the  port  or  city 
furnished  in  a  general  way  there  were  no  other  advantages.  Gradually, 
however,  the  idea  was  taken  up  on  much  broader  lines,  dock  and  storage 
facilities  were  provided,  and  many  special  improvements  were  created  for 
the  benefit  of  the  trader. 

We  will  pass  over  the  gradual  advancement  made  and  deal  at  once 
with  the  great  port  of  Hamburg,  which  furnishes  the  most  complete  example 
of  up-to-date  methods  and  successful  operation  of  the  "Free  Zone"  of 
to-day.  Even  in  the  case  of  Hamburg,  however,  the  growth  has  been  grad- 
ual. The  city,  which  lies  some  eighty-five  miles  up  the  Elbe,  started  first 
to  improve  the  river  by  dredging  to  enable  vessels  of  reasonable  size  to  go 
from  the  seaboard  to  the  city  itself,  and  this  improvement  has  gone  steadily 
forward  until  to-day  they  have  from  thirty-five  to  forty  feet  depth  of 
water,  enabling  vessels  of  the  deepest  draught  to  go  up  at  high  tide. 

The  Germans  then  owned  few  vessels  of  their  own,  the  carrying  trade 
being  largely  in  the  hands  of  the  English  and  the  Dutch;  but  with  wise 
foresight,  they  realized  that  if  they  could  make  their  city  attractive  to 
shipping,  and  at  the  same  time  demonstrate  to  their  own  merchants  that  it 
was  desirable  to  establish  ocean  trade  routes  as  quickly  as  possible  and 
upbuild  their  own  shipping,  they  would  be  able  largely  to  control  the  trade 
of  Northern  Europe;  and  further,  that  their  port  would  be  extensively  used 
for  transshipment  purposes  and  vessels  of  other  nations  would  call  there 
on  their  trading  voyages  to  and  from  the  East,  including  China,  Japan, 
India,  the  Straits  Settlements,  Australia,  and  other  points  of  exploitation 
which  were  opening  to  the  world's  commerce. 


IK) 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


They  saw  plainly  that  only  by  these  methods  could  they  bring  their 
city  to  the  fore  as  a  great  shipping  center.  Antwerp,  Bremen,  Trieste, 
Stettin  and  other  European  cities  were  also  striving  for  the  trade.  Gradually 
their  accomplishments  have  borne  out  all  their  expectations.  They  have 
spent  many  millions  of  dollars  improving  their  harbor,  and  have  built  great 
warehouses  for  the  accommodation  of  goods  which  could  be  stored  at  a  low 
cost,  either  to  be  sent  to  various  ports  of  Europe  or  transshipped  to  foreign 
countries.  They  have  provided  the  finest  piers  and  basins  possible  for  the 
accommodation  of  vessels,  the  newest  system  of  loading  and  discharging 
has  been  introduced,  dry  docks  of  the  highest  type  and  workshops  have 
been  built,  furnishing  the  means  for  repairs  to  be  made  at  low  cost;  and 
they  have  opened  up  a  large  area  for  manufacturing  purposes  and  for  the 
sorting  of  goods.  Their  charges  for  all  privileges  are  placed  at  the  lowest 
basis  consistent  with  a  small  return  on  the  capital  invested. 

The  emigration  trade  has  not  been  overlooked  and  special  buildings 
have  been  provided  where  the  emigrant  can  live  from  arrival  until  depar- 
ture at  a  low  cost,  or  even  without  charge;  so  that  Hamburg  is  now  the 
most  popular  port  for  this  purpose  in  Europe. 

Their  merchants  have  thus  succeeded  not  only  in  attracting  vessels  of 
other  nations,  but  have  created  a  shipping  of  their  own,  and  to-day  they 
are  large  owners  of  steamers  and  regular  lines  have  been  established  to  all 
the  great  trading  ports  of  the  world.  These  advantages  and  the  regularity 
of  sailings  draw  from  all  ports  of  Europe  the  export  products  which  would 
undoubtedly  go  to  other  nearer  seaport  cities  if  the  same  advantages  for 
quick  transit  to  destination  could  be  secured.  Germany  is  a  protective 
country  and  consequently  Hamburg  is  not,  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word, 
a  ''Free  Port";  but  it  has  the  "Free  Zone"  which  takes  in  a  large  portion 
of  the  port  itself.  If  foreign  goods  pass,  however,  from  the  "Zone,"  they 
then  pay  the  same  duty  that  they  would  have  been  charged  if  they  had 
entered  Germany  from  any  other  port. 

New  York  to-day,  notwithstanding  our  enormous  commerce,  is  prac- 
tically in  the  same  position  which  Hamburg  was  in  100  years  ago.  We 
have  no  vessels  of  our  own  and  are  entirely  dependent  upon  the  shipping 
of  other  nations  to  bring  the  world's  products  to  our  City,  or  to  take  away 
the  goods  which  are  manufactured  for  export  in  our  own  sphere  or  which 
reach  us  from  inland  places.  By  reason  of  our  enormous  population  and 
our  natural  advantages  as  a  shipping  port,  we  have  up  to  the  present  been 
able,  even  without  much  of  an  effort  on  our  part,  to  hold  our  commanding 
position  as  the  port  of  entry  and  departure  of  a  large  percentage  of  the 
foreign  trade  of  the  United  States. 

Aided  by  our  splendid  waterfront,  the  North  and  East  rivers  and  their 
natural  facilities  for  dock  purposes,  we  have  kept  fairly  up-to-date  in  this 
particular,  but  are  sadly  lacking  in  many  other  of  the  necessary  and 
important  shipping  facilities  which  we  have  briefly  enumerated  as  per- 
taining to  Hamburg.  What  has  been  done  by  that  port  we  can  undoubt- 
edly do  in  our  own  City,  and  unquestionably  reap  equal,  if  not  greater, 
advantages.  The  handling  of  the  problem  by  us  will  be  much  easier 
than  it  was  with  them,  and  should  be  done  at  much  less  expense. 

The  Changing  Conditions  of  Commerce 

Conditions  are  changing  rapidly.  While  circumstances  have  favored 
us  thus  far,  we  can  no  longer  depend  on  good  luck  to  keep  us  to  the  front, 
and  our  people  must  at  once  take  action  to  protect  their  interests.  The 
cities  of  Boston,  Philadelphia,  Savannah,  Newport  News,  New  Orleans, 
Montreal  and  others  to  the  north  are  making  great  strides  to  our  detriment, 
and  several  of  them  are  spending  large  amounts  of  money  to  place  them- 
selves in  a  position  to  rival  us  in  advantages  and  shipping  facilities. 


117 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


The  opening  of  the  Panama  Canal  is  to  a  large  extent  responsible  for 
this  activity".  It  will  unquestionably  bring  to  this  country  an  expansion 
of  shipping  interests  and  a  vast  extension  and  increase  in  our  foreign 
trade.  There  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  arouse  ourselves  to  a  realiza- 
tion of  the  situation  so  that  we  may  place  our  port  in  a  position  that  will 
enable  us  still  to  command  a  large  share  of  America's  foreign  commerce. 

It  is  perfectly  feasible  to  establish  a  ''Free  Zone"  so  situated  as  to 
give  us  easy  connection  with  all  our  trunk  lines  and  afford  opportunity 
for  vessels  entering  our  port  to  do  so  at  a  minimum  of  cost  as  compared 
with  the  charges  they  are  called  upon  to  pay  to-day;  and  if  this  is  done, 
large  warehouses  being  built  and  all  the  other  necessary  advantages,  as 
outlined,  provided  for,  we  shall  reap  benefits  which  will  undoubtedly  repay 
the  cost  to  us  very  many  times  over. 

This  can  be  done  without  in  any  way  interfering  with  the  trans- 
Atlantic  or  other  established  steamship  lines  which  may  still  prefer  in 
entering  our  port  to  load  and  discharge  at  their  present  wharves  and  under 
their  present  arrangements. 

In  November,  1913,  I  prepared  a  paper  on  this  subject,  and  in  conclusion 
stated: 

Before  we  can  decide  definitely  to  advocate  a  "Free  Zone"  we 
must  first  determine  whether  we  can  gain  sufficient  advantage  to  warrant 
the  expenditure. 

Will  it  be  possible  for  us  to  obtain  the  many  millions  required 
to  carry  through  the  undertaking  successfully? 

We  must  use  wisdom  in  selecting  the  site,  and  a  large  area  is 
necessary. 

Can  we  attract  sufficient  manufacturing  plants  to  the  ''Free  Zone" 
to  warrant  this  being  a  distinctive  feature  of  the  enterprise? 

Will  it  be  possible  by  means  of  a  "Free  Zone"  not  only  to  attract 
foreign  shipping,  but  to  upbuild  our  own  maritime  interests? 

Are  we  willing,  if  the  money  is  procurable,  to  expend  it  for  the 
general  benefit  without  looking  for  any  large  return,  which  would  be 
difficult  to  obtain? 

The  Necessity  for  Taking  Action 

I  then  stated  that  these  questions,  answered  in  the  affirmative,  would 
unquestionably  justify  our  City  in  taking  action. 

Since  that  time  I  have  given  further  thorough  and  careful  study  to 
the  question,  and  the  more  light  that  it  is  possible  to  obtain  and  the 
more  the  matter  is  analyzed  and  looked  into,  the  more  necessary,  advan- 
tageous and  desirable  appears  to  be  the  project. 

If  others  have  made  the  unquestioned  success  which  it  has  been  clearly 
shown  they  have,  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  also  succeed 
equally  well. 

There  only,  therefore,  remains  one  point — my  second  question — which 
deals  with  the  money  proposition  and  whether  we  can  secure  the  necessary 
funds  to  put  through  the  work.  We  cannot  look  to  the  National  Gov- 
ernment except  in  a  small  degree,  and  will  perhaps  be  satisfied  if  we 
secure  their  consent  to  undertake  the  work.  It  must,  therefore,  become  a 
State  and  City  enterprise,  and  largely  the  latter.  We  have  undertaken 
many  works  for  the  benefit  of  our  State  calling  for  as  large  an  expenditure 
of  money,  and  there  is  no  reason,  therefore,  why  we  should  not  succeed  in 
securing  the  amount  necessary. 

Our  aim,  if  realized,  will  unquestionably  give  new  life  to  our  shipping 
and  manufacturing  interests.  We  shall  become  more  than  ever  the  "Metrop- 
olis" of  the  Western  Hemisphere,  and  the  greatest  seaport,  not  alone  of 
the  United  States,  but  of  the  entire  world.  Other  nations  are  doing  their 
utmost  to  retain  their  prominent  position,  and  we  must  emulate  their 
example  or  we  shall  unquestionably  fall  back  in  the  struggle  for  commercial 
supremacy.  Now  is  the  time;  New  York  City  is  the  place.  Let  us  hope 
that  our  merchants  and  our  people  generally  will  show  themselves  equal  to 
the  opportunity  which  presents  itself. 


118 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  41)  An  Ideal  Site  for  a  Free  Port 

I  have  had  considerable  experience  in  investigating  free  ports,  or  free 
areas  in  ports,  and  I  believe  the  interior  areas  of  Jamaica  Bay  would  be 
admirably  adapted  to  this  important  purpose.  On  the  ground  made  by 
dredging  channels  of  approach  to  these  areas,  islands  of  large  extent  could 
be  made,  on  which  industries  of  various  kinds  could  be  established,  raw 
materials  received  free  of  duty,  the  materials  worked  into  goods  and  the 
duty  paid  when  sent  away — all  under  the  charge  of  United  States  Govern- 
ment inspectors,  as  in  bond  warehouses. 

Another  important  feature  of  all  ports  is  the  location  of  inflammables, 
and  it  is  often  difl&cult  to  find  a  suitable  place  where  there  is  no  danger 
to  a  crowded  port.  In  the  interior  area  of  Jamaica  Bay  there  are  many 
marsh  or  shoal  areas  where  large  depots  for  inflammables  could  be  con- 
veniently established,  and  where  bulk  oil,  kerosene,  naphtha,  gasoline  and 
other  inflammable  products  could  be  deposited. — From  a  letter  by  Dr.  Elmer 
L.  Corthell. 


(Note  42) 

The  Immediate  Need  For  a  Comprehensive  Plan 

This  Association,  through  its  Committee  on  Harbor,  Docks  and  Ter- 
minals, has  recently  given  very  careful  consideration  to  the  traflic,  terminal 
and  industrial  conditions  in  and  adjacent  to  this  City.  As  a  result  of  this 
study,  the  Association  is  of  the  opinion  that  immediate  steps  should  be 
taken  to  promote  the  securing  and  adoption  in  the  near  future  of  a  com- 
prehensive plan  for  the  development  of  the  Port  of  New  York. 

The  need  of  such  a  comprehensive  plan  rests  primarily  in  the  facts: 

A.  That  no  general  plan  or  movement  has  ever  been  made  to  utilize 
many  acres  of  the  Port  that  possess  economic  and  physical  advan- 
tages, and 

B.  That  the  competition  for  sites  within  certain  restricted  areas  has 
raised  the  value  of  the  land,  wharf  and  terminal  sites  to  an  amount 
where  the  interest  and  rental  charges  thereon  are  increasing  the 
cost  to  the  shipper  and  consumer  beyond  economical  necessities; 

C.  That  the  efforts  of  the  authorities  and  private  interests  have  here- 
tofore been  directed  solely  toward  the  remedying  of  and  planning 
for  restricted  areas  which  comprise  only  a  few  of  the  units  of  the 
entire  Port  problem. 

The  ideal  conditions  for  industrial  development,  especially  in  localities 
otherwise  favored  by  nature  like  New  York,  are: 

a.  Cheap  lands  for  industrial  sites  and  low  rental  charges; 

b.  Close  proximity  and  easy  access  to  rail  or  water  carriage; 

c.  Eeasonable  proximity  to  labor  markets  and  homes,  and  easy  access 
thereto  for  cartage; 

d.  Readily  and  always  obtainable  food  supplies  with  economical  facili- 
ties for  distribution. 

With  perhaps  one  exception,  in  previous  plans  made  for  the  ameliora- 
tion of  specific  localities,  little  or  no  attempt  has  been  made  to  co-ordinate 
rail  and  water  traffic,  to  minimize  cartage,  and  no  general  application  of 
economic  engineering  principles  has  been  applied  to  the  general  terminal 
facilities  and  rail  or  water  transportation  interests. — Extract  from  a  letter 
written  by  The  Merchants'  Association  of  New  York,  by  W.  A.  Marble, 
President,  to  Mayor  Mitchel.        Greater  New  York,''  February  9,  1914.) 


119 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


(Note  43)  New  York  the  Industrial  Metropolis 

New  York  City  is  not  only  the  leading  city  and  the  commercial  center 
of  the  United  States,  but  also  the  industrial  metropolis,  holding  first  place 
in  the  total  value  of  manufactured  products  as  well  as  in  many  individual 
industries.  In  1909  the  population  of  New  York  City  was  practically  equal 
to  that  of  the  State  of  Ohio,  and  exceeded  only  by  Pennsylvania,  Illinois 
and  New  York  itself,  but  the  value  of  its  manufactured  products  exceeded 
that  reported  by  any  State  except  Pennsylvania  and  New  York.  This  pre- 
dominance in  manufactures  is  closely  connected  with  the  abundant  supply 
of  labor,  its  large  immigration  population  being  in  particular  an  influential 
factor  in  causing  manufacturing  enterprises  to  locate  there.  New  York 
City  is  the  chief  center  of  trade  between  the  United  States  and  Europe, 
and  also  one  of  the  principal  distributing  points  for  domestic  trade.  This 
commercial  importance  has  also  contributed  to  the  high  rank  of  the  City 
in  manufacturing  industries  and  to  making  New  York  the  financial  center 
of  the  United  States,  thereby  rendering  it  easy  to  obtain  capital  for  the 
establishment  and  extension  of  such  industries.  .  .  .  The  value  of  the 
City's  manufactures  represented  9.8  per  cent  of  the  total  manufactured 
products  of  the  United  States  in  1909  and  10.3  per  cent  in  1904.  There 
were  21  industries  in  New  York  City  in  1909  for  which  the  value  of  products 
in  excess  of  $20,000,000  was  reported.  For  two  of  these  industries,  the 
refining  of  cane  sugar  and  smelting  and  refining  of  copper,  statistics  cannot 
be  presented  separately  without  disclosing  the  operations  of  individual 
establishments.  The  other  19  industries,  arranged  in  order  of  value  of 
products,  are  indicated  in  the  following  tabular  statement,  which  shows  the 
absolute  and  relative  increase  in  this  respect  between  1904  and  1909,  and 
also  the  percentage  which  the  value  of  products  for  each  industry  repre- 
sents of  the  corresponding  total  for  the  State: 


Industry  Amount 

Clothing,   women's    $266,477,000 

Clothing,      men's,  including 

shirts    218,411,000 

Printing  and  publishing   183,509,000 

Slaughtering  and  meat  packing  95,862,000 

Foundry    and    machine  shop 

products    63,853,000 

Tobacco  manufactures    62,488,000 

Bread  and  other  bakerv  prod- 
ucts  \   61,904,000 

Liquors,  malt    53,469,000 

Millinery  and  lace  goods   51,239,000 

Fur  goods    39,874,000 

Gas,  illuminating  and  heating.  34,117,000 

Paint  and  varnish    26,664,000 

Musical     instruments,  pianos, 

organs  and  materials    25,516,000 

Furnishing  goods,  men's   25,496,000 

Patent  medicines  and  com- 
pounds and  druggists '  prepa- 
rations   24,984,000 

Lumber  and  timber    products.  24,122,000 

Copper,     tin     and  sheet-iron 

products    23,303,000 

Artificial  flowers  and  feathers 

and  plumes    21,098,000 

Confectionery    20,062,000 


Per  cent  A^alue  of  products,  1909 
of  total 
for  the 
State 
97.8 


82.1 
84.6 
75.4 

41.4 
81.5 

71.8 
68.8 
98.3 
96.5 
80.6 
93.4 

75.8 
60.4 


66.9 
33.3 

60.6 

99.7 
78.6 


Increase  over  1904 

Amount 

Per  cent 

$98,058,000 

58.2 

68,927,000 

46.1 

45,007,000 

32.5 

39,924,000 

71.4 

5,916,000 

10.2 

11,963,000 

23.7 

17,904,000 

40.7 

10,301,000 

23.9 

18,896,000 

58.4 

14,595,000 

57.7 

4,402,000 

14.8 

3,834,000 

16.8 

6,586,000 

34.8 

8,883,000 

53.5 

6,868,000 

37.9 

2,903,000 

13.7 

5,914,000 

34.0 

17,132,000 

432.0 

6,017,000 

42.8 

120 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


Of  the  five  boroughs  which  form  New  York  City,  the  Borough  of  Man- 
hattan is  the  most  important  industrially,  the  value  of  the  manufactured 
products  reported  by  the  establishments  within  its  limits  in  1909  consti- 
tuting 68.4  per  cent  of  the  total  for  the  entire  city.  The  proportions  of 
the  total  contributed  by  the  other  boroughs  in  that  year  were  as  follows: 
Brooklyn,  20.6  per  cent;  Queens,  7.5  per  cent;  the  Bronx,  2.1  per  cent;  and 
Richmond,  1.5  per  cent. 

The  totals  presented  for  New  York  City  do  not  include  statistics  for 
three  establishments  operated  by  the  Federal  Government,  namely,  the 
United  States  Navy  Yard,  with  3,622  wage-earners  and  products  valued  at 
$7,032,416  in  1909;  the  United  States  Naval  Clothing  Factory,  with  96 
wage-earners  and  products  valued  at  $670,198,  located  in  Brooklyn,  and  the 
United  States  Lighthouse  Establishment,  with  60  wage-earners  and  products, 
such  as  illuminating  and  signal  apparatus  and  machinery  and  other  lighthouse 
supplies,  valued  at  $995,745,  located  at  Tompkinsville,  in  the  Borough  of 
Richmond. — From  the  L^nited  States  Census  Report  on  Manufactures. 


(Note  44) 

Average  Number  of  Wage=earners 


1909  1904  1899 

Manhattan                                                     385,358  339,221  285,265 

Bronx                                                              14,434  * 

Brooklyn                                                        123,883  104,905  87,445 

Queens                                                            23,891  14,905  10,684 

Richmond                                                        6,436  5,595  5,192 


554,002          464,716  388,586 

Value  of  Products 

1909                   1904  1899 

Manhattan                                  $1,388,408,005      $1,043,251,293  $810,807,975 

Bronx    42,680,793  * 

Queens                                           151,680,120           92,941,158  35,427,561 

Brooklyn                                         417,222,770          373,462,930  313,617,489 

Richmond                                         29,700,888            16,866,995  13,017,236 


$2,029,692,576      $1,526,523,006  $1,172,870,261 

*  Included  in  Manhattan  Borough. 
— From  United  States  Census  Statistics. 

(Note  45) 

New  York's  Attractions  for  the  Machine  Tool  Industry 

New  York's  Advantages 

If  the  concentration  of  the  industry  in  New  England  is  due  primarily 
to  the  presence  of  a  skilled  labor  supply,  and  in  Ohio  to  the  natural  adjust- 
ment of  the  costs  of  assembling  materials  and  in  reaching  the  market,  what 
then  are  the  advantages  which  the  New  York  location  presents? 

As  compared  with  New  England,  New  York  furnishes  definite  savings 
in  the  cost  of  assembling  the  raw  materials.  New  York  is  nearer  to  the 
iron  and  steel  centers  of  Pennsylvania  and  the  freight  rates  on  iron  and 
steel  products  are  approximately  12  per  cent  lower  than  to  New  England 
points. 

In  the  cost  of  securing  the  fuel  supply,  New  York  furnishes  greater 
savings.  The  all-rail  rate  from  the  bituminous  coal  fields  in  Pennsylvania 
to  Worcester  is  $2.90  per  ton;  to  New  York,  $1.80  per  ton.  The  rail-and- 
water  rate  from  Hampton  Roads,  via  Boston  to  Worcester,  is  about  $1.60 
per  ton,  and  to  New  York  approximately  80  cents. 


THE      PROBLEM      OF     GREATER     NEW  YORK 


While  it  is  true  that  the  cost  of  the  materials  in  the  metal-working 
machine  industry  seldom  amount  to  30  per  cent  of  the  total  production 
cost,  yet  the  costs  of  assembling  the  materials  are  very  important  factors 
in  the  total  cost  of  the  materials. 

The  New  Englander  usually  attacks  the  New  York  location  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  labor  supply;  the  Westerner  from  the  viewpoint  of  reach- 
ing the  markets;  yet  in  spite  of  these  arguments,  there  are  important 
factors  in  favor  of  the  New  York  location  from  both  standpoints. 

The  Labor  Supply  in  New  York 

The  statement  sometimes  made  that  the  New  York  location  is  imprac- 
ticable on  account  of  the  difficulty  of  securing  a  proper  labor  supply  is 
based  on  misinformation.  The  several  larger  manufacturers  of  metal-work- 
ing machine  products  in  New  York  in  recent  interviews  stated  that  New 
York  furnishes  them  an  adequate  and  satisfactory  supply  of  skilled  labor, 
and  that  the  open-shop  principle  is  generally  adhered  to. 

It  is  frequently  stated  that  the  well-paid  mechanic,  accustomed  to  own 
his  home  in  the  smaller  community,  is  never  satisfied  with  living  conditions 
in  New  York,  yet  the  consensus  of  opinion  among  employers  of  skilled 
labor  in  New  York  seems  to  be  that  well-paid  labor  prefers  the  City.  Once 
having  enjoyed  City  life,  such  labor  refuses  to  abide  in  the  smaller  commu- 
nity. In  fact,  the  manufacturer  in  the  smaller  community  finds  it  necessary 
to  furnish  his  employees  ''citified"  recreation. 

Moreover,  it  is  forgotten  that  the  living  conditions  of  the  smaller 
community,  together  with  the  advantages  of  the  City,  can  be  secured  in  the 
outlying  sections  of  the  Metropolitan  District.  One  large  plant  in  another 
line  of  industry — but  employing  a  high  percentage  of  skilled  labor — which 
moved  its  establishment  to  a  suburban  community,  found  that  within  a 
comparatively  short  time  90  per  cent  of  its  labor  force,  which  was  drawn 
from  different  parts  of  the  City,  had  become  residents  of  the  community 
in  which  the  plant  was  located. 

It  is  also  stated  that  wages  for  skilled  mechanics  in  New  York  are 
excessively  high,  yet  a  comparison  of  the  wages  for  tool  makers  between 
three  metal-working  machine  establishments  located  in  New  England  and 
two  New  York  establishments,  brought  out  the  fact  that  there  was  but  a 
slight  difference.  New  York  has  a  large  and  diversified  labor  supply  to 
draw  from,  and  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  to  believe  that  it  would  be 
impossible  to  develop  a  well-organized  and  skilled  force  for  the  metal-working 
machine  industry. 

Advantage  in  Distribution 

As  compared  with  New  York,  New  England  is  relatively  isolated  as  a 
distributing  center.  Isolation  of  this  type  is  costly.  For  instance,  the 
rail  rate  on  planing  machines  from  Worcester  to  New  York  in  carload  lots 
is  20  cents  per  hundred  pounds.  The  water  rate  from  New  York  to  New 
Orleans  on  such  machines  is  only  60  cents  per  hundred  pounds. 

The  New  York  location  gives  the  manufacturer  the  advantage  of  similar 
low  rates  to  many  of  the  important  markets  for  metal-working  machinery 
in  the  Eastern  Atlantic,  Southern  Atlantic  and  Gulf  States.  Water  rates 
from  New  York  to  the  Pacific  Coast  should  enable  the  New  York  manu- 
facturer to  compete  satisfactorily  in  the  rapidly  growing  far  Western  mar- 
ket. It  is  evident  that  for  reaching  the  Eastern  market,  the  manufacturer 
in  New  York  has  a  distinct  advantage  over  the  manufacturers  located 
in  Ohio. 

The  Export  Trade 

The  most  striking  feature  of  the  development  of  the  metal-working 
machine  industry  in  the  last  few  years  has  been  the  growth  of  the  export 
trade.  In  1909  the  value  of  such  exports  was  $3,640,034,  while  in  1913  it 
amounted  to  $16,097,315.    American  metal-working  machine  tools  are  recog- 


122 


THE       STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


nized  as  the  standards  in  almost  every  over-sea  market,  and  the  inventive- 
ness of  the  American  manufacturer  has  enabled  him  to  keep  ahead  of  his 
European  rivals.  New  York  City  controls  the  export  trade  in  the  industry 
from  the  United  States.  In  1912,  approximately  71  per  cent  of  the  total 
value  of  such  exports  passed  through  this  port. 

For  the  manufacturer  who  is  interested  in  the  systematic  development 
of  the  export  markets,  this  City  is  the  location  which  furnishes  the  re- 
quired shipping  facilities,  and  enables  him  to  make  an  aggressive  and  direct 
campaign  in  pushing  the  sales  of  his  product. 

The  Local  Market 

Last,  but  not  least.  New  York  City  furnishes  an  important  local  market 
for  the  use  of  metal-working  machines.  One  manufacturer  who  has  been 
located  here  for  a  number  of  years,  stated  that  the  success  of  his  establish- 
ment was  largely  due  to  its  location  in  this  City.  It  furnishes  a  number 
of  opportunities  for  special  development,  and  as  an  order  market  it  is 
recognized  as  the  largest  in  the  United  States. 

Every  metal-working  machine  manufacturer  of  any  importance  is  repre- 
sented here,  either  directly  or  through  selling  agents.  Orders  for  metal- 
working  machines  for  use  in  all  parts  of  the  country  are  given  here.  In 
fact,  the  president  of  one  of  the  largest  metal-working  machine  supply 
houses  in  Xew  York  said  that  he  believed  that  between  $20,000,000  and 
$25,000,000  worth  of  machines  are  ordered  annually  in  New  York. 

For  many  metal-working  machine  manufacturers  who  find  themselves 
hindered  by  their  present  location,  therefore.  New  York  offers  advantages 
and  opportunities  which  might  furnish  a  solution  of  their  problem. — From 
an  article  on  the  Metal-working  Machinery  Industry,  prepared  by  the  In- 
dustrial Bureau  of  the  Merchants'  Association  for  "Greater  New  York" 
(February  9,  1914). 


(Note  46) 

Why  Manufacturers  Are  Leaving  the  City 

The  group  of  establishments  located  in  Brooklyn  shows  quite  clearly 
the  effect  upon  the  reasons  for  location  of  marketing  a  large  product  in 
New  York  City.  Hence  the  firms  marketing  a  large  proportion  of  their 
product  in  New  York  City  find  the  accessibility  of  the  New  York  market 
to  be  their  chief  advantage,  while  the  others  find  their  chief  advantages 
in  other  features,  such  as  saving  in  cost  of  site,  labor  supply  and  trans- 
portation facilities. 

Firm  (d),  which  has  been  located  at  its  present  site  for  many  years, 
finds  many  disadvantages  there  as  well  as  advantages.  Thus  Brooklyn 
furnishes  a  large  supply  of  unskilled  labor.  The  saving  in  cost  is  only  a 
saving  in  comparison  with  Manhattan  sites.  Among  the  disadvantages  that 
they  find  are  lack  of  transportation  facilities,  particularly  the  high  cost  of 
direct  access  to  waterfront  property,  and  the  consequent  necessity  of  truck- 
ing. These  disadvantages  are  so  weighty  that  the  firm  is  seriously  con- 
sidering removing  its  plant  to  New  Jersey. 

Another  factory,  manufacturing  paints,  has  found  the  location  in  Brook- 
lyn so  hampering  that  the  proprietor  has  purchased  a  new  site,  and  is 
erecting  a  factory  at  Elizabethport,  N.  J.  This  man  wished  to  expand 
his  business,  and  in  order  to  do  this  he  found  it  necessary  to  purchase 
additional  land.  This  could  be  obtained  in  the  vicinity  of  the  present 
plant  in  Brooklyn  only  at  a  very  great  cost.  In  discussing  the  difl&culties, 
he  pointed  out  very  clearly  that  the  cost  of  such  a  removal  would  be 
very  great  indeed,  but  that  the  main  item  of  cost  was  the  initial  removal 
of  the  machinery.  It  made  very  little  difference,  therefore,  whether  he 
moved  his  factory  a  few  blocks  or  several  miles.    In  Brooklyn,  the  plant 


123 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER     NEW  YORK 


occupied  a  scant  acre  at  some  distance  from  the  waterfront;  in  the  new 
location  there  will  be  fifty-eight  acres,  with  direct  water  and  rail  facilities, 
thus  eliminating  trucking  and  rehandling.  There  wiU  also  be  a  large  saving 
in  taxes  and  insurance,  and  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  labor  is  anticipated. 
The  latter  is  of  the  cheapest  grade,  composed  mainly  of  Poles. 

With  one  exception  (1),  the  establishments  composing  the  Queens  group 
are  located  on  the  waterfront,  and  do  the  largest  and  most  essential  part 
of  their  shipping  by  water.  In  the  case  of  establishment  (h),  this  is  espe- 
cially necessary,  because  about  45  per  cent  of  its  product  is  exported. — From 
'  *  Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population  in  New  York  City, ' '  by  Edward  Ewing 
Pratt,  Ph.D. 


(Note  47) 

Where  the  Factory  Workers  Reside 

The  data  collected  from  workers  in  lower  Manhattan  show  that  a  very 
small  proportion  of  them  reside  in  the  Bronx.  This  is  also  true  of  Man- 
hattan above  Fourteenth  Street  (see  Table  1).  In  fact,  only  5.5  per  cent 
of  the  workers  below  Fourteenth  Street  reside  in  the  Bronx,  and  2,9  per 
cent  of  those  working  in  other  parts  of  Manhattan.  The  proportion  of 
factory  workers  residing  in  Westchester  County  is  negligible.  On  the  other 
hand,  large  numbers  of  all  classes  of  workers,  even  those  working  the  longest 
hours  and  receiving  the  lowest  wages,  live  in  Brooklyn  and  Queens.  23.4 
per  cent  and  4.6  per  cent  respectively  of  the  workers  in  lower  and  upper 
Manhattan  lived  in  Brooklyn,  and  2.8  per  cent  lived  in  Queens. — From 
' '  Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population  in  New  York  City, ' '  by  Edward 
Ewing  Pratt,  Ph.D. 


(Note  48) 

The  Welfare  of  Factory  Hands  Dependent  Upon  Location 

One  of  the  greatest  gains  that  can  be  made  by  the  removal  of  a 
manufacturing  establishment  from  Manhattan  to  the  less  congested  bor- 
oughs or  the  suburbs  is  the  improvement  of  factory  conditions  and  its  effect 
upon  the  personnel  of  the  plant,  physically,  mentally  and  morally. 

The  suburban  manufacturers,  if  not  the  employers  located  near  the 
center,  are,  to  some  extent,  able  to  pick  their  labor  and  to  weed  out  the 
undesirables.  This  the  employer  located  in  the  center  of  busy  Manhattan 
where  labor  goes  and  comes  without  any  attempt  at  permanency,  cannot 
do.  In  the  center  of  the  City  the  very  overcrowding  of  the  factory  and 
work-place  makes  for  looser  morals. 

In  a  congested  district  conditions  prejudicial  to  the  greatest  efficiency 
of  workmen  exist,  not  only  in  the  factory  itself  but  also  in  the  home. 
In  Manhattan,  at  the  end  of  a  day's  work  in  a  crowded  factory,  the  worker 
returns  to  a  crowded  home  in  a  dingy,  ill-lighted,  ill-ventilated,  dirty  and 
often  unsanitary  tenement.  For  this  he  pays  a  high  rent,  while  in  a 
suburban  manufacturing  district  or  almost  any  outlying  section  of  Greater 
New  York  he  could  obtain  well-lighted,  well-ventilated  rooms,  not  closely 
packed  in  rows  of  five  and  six-story  tenements.  It  is  quite  undeniable 
that  under  these  conditions  of  overcrowding  the  standards  of  life,  whether 
they  be  physical  or  moral,  break  down  much  more  easily  than  in  a  small 
town,  where  neighbors  know  neighbors  and  where  each  adheres  to  a  certain 
community  ideal. — From  ' '  Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population  in  New  York 
City"  by  Edward  Ewing  Pratt,  PhD. 


124 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


(Note  49)         Paris  Sets  an  Example  for  New  York 

With  the  distribution  of  the  factory  districts  to  the  outskirts  of  the 
City,  workmen's  suburban  trains  would  not  need  to  be  operated  into  the 
heart  of  the  City.  Thus  the  country  districts  would  be  brought  into  close 
contact  with  the  manufacturing  districts  of  a  great  city. 

For  example,  in  Paris,  where  for  many  decades  factories  have  been 
prohibited  from  running  riot  over  the  city,  the  manufactories  are  located 
largely  outside  of  the  city  wall.  Congestion  of  traffic  in  the  subways  and 
street  cars  is  unknown,  and  many  of  the  workers  eat  their  lunches  in  their 
own  homes.  There  is  no  great  problem  there  of  gathering  up  the  people 
from  the  suburbs  and  carrying  them  into  a  highly  congested  area  during 
one  or  two  rush  hours  and"^  then  bringing  them  out  again  at  the  close  of 
the  day's  work.  There  are  no  highly  congested  districts  in  Paris,  either  of 
population  or  of  manufactures. 

No  doubt  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  foregoing  progress  for  relief 
of  congestion  of  population  in  New  York  City  to  put  into  practical  opera- 
tion, and  the  part  which  would  doubtless  be  subject  to  the  greatest  oppo- 
sition, is  the  proposal  to  remove  manufacturing  establishments  from  Man- 
hattan and  to  segregate  them  in  specified  districts  in  the  suburbs.  How- 
ever, if  I  have  correctly  analyzed  the  currents  of  economic  movement, 
certain  groups  of  industries  will  offer  little  resistance  beyond  the  stag- 
nating influences  described  as  inertia.  Keal  estate  interests  will  doubtless 
predict  dire  disaster.  But  if  the  steady  growth  of  the  City  continues,  the 
factory  buildings  will  be  only  temporarily  vacant.  Certain  other  industries 
will  find  locations  outside  of  "the  central  City  extremely  inconvenient,  others 
will  find  them  even  advantageous.  Such  differences  could  be  adjusted 
without  great  difficulty. 

Any  objection  which  may  be  offered  at  this  point  is  that  some  of 
the  facts  cited  in  an  earlier  chapter  seem  to  show  that  any  plan  involving 
the  removal  of  factories  from  the  City  cannot  be  successfully  carried  out, 
because  workmen  will  not  leave  New  York  City,  and  will  not  move  to 
the  country.  This  objection  brings  forward  two  very  important  points 
upon  which  the  success  of  establishing  suburban  industrial  centers  stands 
or  falls.  First,  the  location  must  not  be  far  from  Manhattan;  in  fact,  it 
must  be  in  the  very  immediate  vicinity.  Second,  there  must  be  definite  and 
constant,  but  not  patronizing,  efforts  to  replace  the  amusements  of  the 
City  with  adequate  substitutes. — From  ''Causes  of  Congestion  of  Population 
in  New  York  City,''  by  Edward  Ewing  Pratt,  Ph.D. 


MAMUrACTURIMG  STATISTICS  OF  New  ^fORK  C 

;iTY 

Borough 

Number 
of 

Establoh 

Persons  engaged  in  Industry  ■ 

Capital 

Salaries 

Wages 

Cost  of 
Materials 

Value  of 
Products 

Value  added 
Manufacture 

Total 

Salanad 

^1/^MM/^TTAN 
BRONX 

1909 

19,769 

500,299 

22,658 

T7:e49 

399,792 

$822726.000 

434,971.000 

123T467000 

«7E5456.0OO 

$1431.089000 

$705,633,000 

i904 

15,9'75 

410,324 

19,367 

51,716 

339,221 

620,526,000 

56,750,000 

IS  2, 000.000 

507030,000 

1.043,252,000 

536,222,000 

1699 

14362 

35.6ei 

285,265 

51 1,91S,000 

40,725,000 

146.505,000 

398,076,000 

eio,esoei00o 

412,732,000 

BROOKLYN 

1909 

5,218 

145.222 

5,495 

15,644 

123,883 

S>362,33TOOO 

S2I,|46.000 

$68,328,000 

»235,I32,000 

*4I7'223,000 

$182,091,000 

1904 

4,182 

119,534 

4,597 

9,932 

104,995 

313,452,000 

13,521,000 

54,535000 

230.809,000 

373463.000 

142,654,000 

1699 

4.30I 

6,826 

87;  445 

263,471.000 

9,097000 

42,341,000 

206,335,000 

313,617,000 

107,282,000 

QUEENS 

1909 

771 

27:495 

74-5 

2,659 

23.891 

1145,307000 

*4,407000 

$14,169,000 

*ii3,,?oo,ooo 

*l  51,680,000 

636^480,000 

1904 

513 

16,669 

SOT 

r,Z57 

14.905 

92,977000 

1,836,000 

a,44o,ooo 

70,403,000 

92,941,000 

22,538,000 

1899 

395 

912 

10,664 

67.420.000 

l,E64,000 

5,534,000 

23,354,000 

35,428,000 

12,074,000 

RICHMOND 

I909 

lao 

157 

90I 

6,436 

t33.3a3,O00 

»l,549.000 

ft3.734,00O 

t>  16.367000 

$29,701,000 

$11,334,000 

1904 

169 

6,435 

159 

5,595 

15,991,000 

912,000 

3,073.000 

9.767000 

16,867,000 

7;080,000 

1899 

185 

3S4 

5,192. 

10,430,000 

5TI,000 

2,277.000 

e,445,ooo 

13.017.000 

6,572,000 

125 


THE      PROBLEM      OF     GREATER     NEW  YORK 


Diagram  showing  the  average 
annuar  percentage  cff  increase  in 
population  of  the  various  wards  of 
Brooklyn  in  the  ten  gears  1900 ->o. 


I.  i.iii 


I  ■ 


I  23456769IO 


12  13  14  15  16  17  e  e  20  21  22  23  20^7  2&  30 


34  26  29  31  32 


Diagram  showing  the  cost  of 
building  operations  in  the  various 
wards  of  Brooklyn  for  the  gear 
ending  Dcc.3l*^  I9ll  = 


3.000.000 


2.000,000 


1.000000 


I    2  34  5  67B9)ollt2l3t4l5i6i7iei9a02l  22  2325Z72830  2426  2931  32 


26-29  -31-32  WARDS 


of  BROOKLYN  and  4- 
ond  5    of  qUEENS 

BOSTON  ,  Mass. 
DETROIT, Mich. 
5T.  LOUIS,  Mo. 
CLEVELAND,  O. 
PITTSBURG,  Pa. 
5UFFAL0  ,  N.Y. 
DALTIMOCE,  Md. 


BUILDING  OPERATIONS  OF  THE  JAMAICA  BAY  DISTRICT  COMPARED 
WITH  THOSE  OF  OTHER  CITIES 


126 


THE      STATISTICAL  APPENDIX 


THE      PROBLEM      OF      GREATER      NEW  YORK 

List  of  Illustrations 

The  Site  of  New  York's  Original  Settlement    Frontispiece 

Page 

The  Port  and  Harbor  of  New  York  (Map)   8 

Manhattan  Has  the  Smallest  Waterfront  (Diagram)   10 

New  York's  Percentage  of  Foreign  Commerce  and  Federal  Appropria- 
tions (Diagram)    11 

The  Island's  Crowded  Waterfront    12 

Congestion  of  Trucks  at  the  Piers   13 

Increase  in  Commerce  and  Increase  in  Wharfage  Since  1898  (Diagram) .  15 

Countless  Craft  of  Every  Sort"    16 

Docking  the  Imperaior  in  the  North  River    17 

Leaving  New  York  in  Order  to  Expand    21 

The  Good  and  the  Bad    23 

Studies  in  New  York  Congestion    26 

One  of  the  Results  of  Overcrowding    27 

Present  Congestion  and  Ideal  Distribution  (Diagram)   28 

Population   of  the   Most   Congested   Districts   of   Seven   Large  Cities 

(Diagram)    29 

The  Site  of  the  New  Pier  Development    32 

The  ''Costly  Sacrifice"  When  Completed    33 

South  Brooklyn  Marginal  Railroad   (Map)   35 

A  Step  in  the  Right  Direction    36 

The  Famous  Bush  Terminal    37 

A  Saving  in  Distance  and  Time  (Diagram)   40 

The  Vast  Size  of  the  ''Auxiliary  Harbor"  (Diagram)    41 

Brooklyn's  Two  Waterfronts    43 

' '  Close  Proximity  to  Water  Carriage  "    49 

A  Great  City  With  an  Idle  Harbor  (Map)   51 

Opening  the  Bay's  Main  Channel    54 

Municipal  Wealth  as  a  By-product    55 

The  First  Two  Steps  (Map)    56 

Map  Showing  First  Step    59 

Map  Showing  Second  Step    61 

Two  Scenes  in  Busy  "Brownsville"    64 

The  City  Impinging  Upon  the  Bay    65 

Areas  of  the  Several  Boroughs  (Diagram)   73 

Population  Movement  in  Greater  New  York  (Diagram) .  V   75 

Value  of  Imports  and  Exports  of  Merchandise  at  the  Ports  of  New 

York,  Boston  and  Philadelphia  (Diagram)   78 

Increase  in  Population  of  the  A^arious  Boroughs  by  Decades  (Diagram) .  93 

Population  in  Various  Districts  of  City  (Map)    95 

Variation  in  New  York's  Percentage  of  Total  Foreign  Commerce  of 

the  United  States  (Diagram)   99 

Manufacturing  Statistics  of  New  York  City   (Table)   125 

Annual  Increase  in  Population  in  Brooklyn  Wards  (Diagram)   126 

Building  Operations  in  Brooklyn  Wards  (Diagram)    126 

Building  Operations  of  the  Jamaica  Bay  District  Compared  With  Those 

of  Other  Cities   (Diagram)   126 

Greater  New  York  and  Long  Island    127 


128 


INDEX 


Index 

Page 

Adams,  Campbell  W   13 

Ambrose  Channel  (see  New  York  City;  Harbor) 

American  Dock  Co   37 

Amsterdam    41 

Amsterdam  Corporation    105 

Antwerp   38-41-55-57-112-113-116-117 

Appropriations,  Harbors  of  U.  S   96 

Areas  (see  New  York  City  and  names  of  boroughs) 

Babbitt,  B.  T   21 

Baltimore    40-57-99-100-101-126 

Barg-e  Canals  (see  also  Erie  Canal)   15-18-71 

Barge  Canal  Terminal  Commission   108-112 

Barren  Island   58-59 

Beach,  Col.  Lansing-  H   40 

Bennet,  William  Stiles    108 

Bergen  Basin   56 

Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment,  Chief  Engineer   5 

Boiler,  A.  P   110 

Bombay  28-29 

Boston   9-19-78-99-100-101-109-117-126 

Bremen   41-117 

Brinton,  Willard  C   16 

Bristol   116 

Bronx,  Borough;  Area    11-50-73-93 

Bronx,  Borough;  Industry   121-125 

Bronx,  Borough;  Land  Value    93 

Bronx,  Borough;  Population    75-93-124 

Bronx,  Borough;  Waterfront    10-37-60-61-62 

Brooklyn,  Borough;  Area   11-42-50-73-75-93 

Brooklyn,  Borough;  Building  Operations    126 

Brooklyn,  Borough;  Growth   61-62-66-126 

Brooklyn,  Borough;  Industry   121-125 

Brooklvn,  Borough;  Land  Value   75-93 

Brocklvn,  Borough;  Population    42-50-57-74-75-93-94-95-124-126 

Brooklyn,  Borough;  Waterfront    10-35-36-37-43 

Brooklyn  Eagle    54-55-93 

Brooklyn  Eastern  District  Terminal    37 

Brooklyn  League    49 

Brooklyn  League   Committee   on   Industrial   Advancement  3-4 

Brooklyn,  Office  of  Borough  President    5 

Brooklyn,  South,   Improvement   35-36 

Brownsville   60-64 

Buffalo    126 

Bureau  of  ]\Iunicipal  Research    5 

Bush  Terminal    23-36-37-40-41 

Calcutta   28-29 

Canarsie   40-41-61 

Cardiff    116 

Cartage,  cost  of    43-58-104 

Chamber    of   Commerce   5-19-47-107 

Charity  Organization  Society   5-23-26-27 

Chicago    19 

Chicago  Harbor  Commission    114 

Chicago  iMunicipal  ^Markets  Commission   58 

Clinton,  DeWitt   9-63 

Cleveland   126 

Commerce  (see  names  of  ports) 

Congestion  (see  ^Manhattan,  New  York  City  and  N.  Y.  C.  Harbor) 

Congestion  of  Population,  N.  Y.  C.  Commission  on   25-29-48 

Cornell  Basin   56-63 

Cornell  Creek   46-86 

Corporation   Counsel's  Office    5 

Corthell,   Dr.   Elmer  L  45-69-71-119 

Cresson,  B.   F.,  Jr   109 

Department  of  Docks  and  Ferries,  New  York  City   5-109 

Department  of  War,  Authority  Over  Channel   11 

Detroit    20-47-128 

Douglass,  William  Harris   16-116 

Engineering  Record    34 

Erie  Canal   (see  also  Barge  Canal)   9-18-63 

Farley,  Philip  P   83 

Fitzgerald,  Desmond    114 


129 


THE      PROBLEM     OF     GREATER     NEW  YORK 

Page 

Ford,  William  G  39-42-83 

Forty-fourth  Street  Piers  (see  New  York  Citv  Harbor  Improvements) 

Free  Ports   52-116-119 

Fresh  Creek    65 

Fresh  Creek  Basin   56-60-61-64 

Galveston  ;  99-100-101 

Gerritsen  Basin    56 

Gillespie,  Gen.  G.  L  13-91 

Glasg-ow   28-29-115 

Hamburg-   

Harbors,  Foreign  ...16-31-38-52-55-57 
Harbors  of  U.  S.  (see  names  of  cities) 

Harbors  of  U.  S.,  Appropriations  for   11-96-97 

Harbors  of  U.  S.,  Improvements    16 

Havre    116 

Hawtree  Basin    56 

Hudson  River  (see  North  River) 

Hughes,  Gov.  Charles  E   89 

Industrial  Communities,  Ideal  Conditions  for   24-52-119 

Tngersoll,  ^Mr   110 

Intracoastal  Waterway   15-18 


31-41-52-101-102-110-112-115-116-117 
■-101-102-110-112-113-114-115-116-117 


Jamaica  Bay,  Advantages    40-41-42-44-45-49-50-51-52-77-83-85-119 

Jamaica  Bay,  Appropriations    42-46-55-77-81-82-87-88-90 

Jamaica  Bay,  Basins    49-55-56-57-58-59-60-61-63-64-66 

Jamaica  Bay,  Commerce     43-58 

Jamaica  Bay,  Development  Cost    53-54-55-56-57-60-62-81 

Jamaica  Bay,  Development  Plan   45-46-53-54-55-56-57-59-60-61-62-63-83- 

84-85-86-87 

Jamaica  Bay,  Dimensions    39-40-41-77 

Jamaica  Bay,  District   43-50-51-64-65-75-94 

Jamaica  Bay,  as  Free  Port    119 

Jamaica  Bay,  Improvement  Commission   39-41-44-46-58-71-81-82-83 

Jamaica  Bay,  Land  Reclamation    49-54-56-58-59-60-61-62-63-66 

Jamaica  Bav,  Land  Value    45-49-58-60-62-66 

Jamaica  Bay,  Legislation    46-55-67-81-82-87-88-89 

Jamaica  Bay,  Location    40-41-42-43-49-51-65-127 

Jamaica  Bay,  Present   Development    46-49-55-56-90 

Jamaica  Bav,  Transportation    43-44-45-49 

Jay  Street  Terminal    37 

Jersey  City    22 


Knight,  Col.  John  G.  D  46-76-81-86-87 

Ijackey,   Oscar  F   57 

Law,  Charles  B   53 

Liverpool   31-41-100-110-112-113-114-115 

Lockwood,  Col.  D.  W   87 

London   28-29-41-101-110-114-115 

Luce,  G.  W    17 

81 
115 
-93 
93 
120 
49 
125 
-93 
124 
-12 


Mackenzie,  Gen.  ^. 

Manchester   52- 


Manhattan,  Borou 
Manhattan, 
Manhattan.  Borough 
:Manhattan.  Borough 
^Manhattan, 
IManhattan, 
Manhattan. 
Manhattan, 
Manhattan 


Area    11-50-73-75 

Borough;  Assessed  Value    .  , 

Congestion   

Financial  Position 

Industry   20-22-48-77-117-121- 


29-34-48-75-77-91- 


Borough;  . 

Borough;  Land  Value   12-33 


Borough ; 
Borough 


Population   75-93 

Waterfront   8-10-11 

Tradition   11-25-28 

Marble,  William  A   23-47- 

Marks,  INIarcus  M  

Marseilles   

Marshall,  Major  U.  L  

Mcl.iaughlin,  John  J    • 

Merchants'  Association,  N.  Y  5-7-12-13-15-16-47-77-102-116-119- 

Merchant  IMarine   ^^"^5: 

Mill   Basin    49-56-57-58-59-60 

Montreal    o 

Montreal,  Harbor  Commissioners  of   112- 

Municipal  Year-Book   93 


119 

9 

116 
88 
83 
123 
102 
-66 
117 
116 
-94 


N^ewark    21 

Newcastle    ii5 

New  Jersey  Harbor  Commission  ^"^^'^^"'^'^"^'^oa^oi  J2 

New  Jersey.  Industry   ;,A^yz?  Jr^ 

New  Orleans   99-100-117 


130 


INDEX 


Page 

New  York  Boat  Owners'  Association   5-14 

New  York  City,  Advantages  ..9-19-20-24-31-50-52-105-106-1U7-11T-121-122-123 

New  York  City,  Appropriations  for  Jamaica  Bav   46-55-56-81-S2 

New  York  City,  Area    11-24-73-75-93 

New  York  City,  Assessed  Valuation   66-93 

New  York  City,  Catskill  Water  Svstem    31 

New  York  Citv,  Congestion    13-25-26-27-28-29-30-48-87-95-124 

New  York  City,  Future    52-67-68-107 

New  York  City,  Growth   -..71-72-73-74-75-93-105-108 

New  York  City,  Harbor  Administration   7-11-12-15-32-38-39-102 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Ambrose    Channel   8-40-41 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Commerce  ...9-11-13-14-15-16-17-18-76-78-84-85-86- 

91-99-100-101-102-103-104-105-108-109-110-116 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Congestion    10-12-14-34-62-67-76-77-105-109-112 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Costs    104-105-109 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Craft   14 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  East  River   8-34-35-37-103-117 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Improvements   32-33-34-35-36-37-40-59-111-112 

New  York  Citv,  Harbor,  Lower  Bay    8 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  North  (or  Hudson)  River ..9-33-34-91-92-103-110-117 

New  York  City,  Harbor.  Problems    7-18-39-45-53-62 

New  York  City,  Harbor.  Statistics   8-14-15-31-40-76-96-103-105-111-112 

New  York  City,  Harbor.  Railroad  Connections  14-35-36-37-44-45 

New  York  City,  Harbor.  U.  S.  Appropriations  for   11-97 

New  York  City,  Harbor,  Upper  Bay   2-S 

New  York  City,  Harbor.  AVar  Department's  Authority  Over  Channels — 11-55- 

60-63-86-87-90-91-92 

New  York  City,  Industry   19-20-21-22-23-24-29-47-48-49-52-119-120-121- 

122-123-124-125 

New  York  City,  Interboro  Transportation   42-77 

New  York  City,  Loss  of  Trade    13-20-21-22-23-123 

New  York  City,  Land  Value    12-33-34-37-49-52-56-58-60-62-66-93 

New  York  City,  Population    9-19-27-28-29-30-72-74-75-93-95-126 

New  York  Citv,  Rapid  Transit    31 

New  York  City,  Site   2-7-9 

New  York  City,  Waterfront    8-10-55-62-96-117 

New  York  Dock  Co  35-36-37 

New  York  Federation  of  Churches   5-95 

New  York  Harbor  Line  Board   87-91-92 

New  York,  Port   of   8-11-76-77-78-109 

New  York  Produce   Exchange   5-99 

New  York  State,  Jamaica  Bay  Legislation    46-55-67-88-89 

New  York  State,  Commerce  Commission    67 

New  York  State,  Waterways  Association   107-108 

Newport  News    117 

Newtown  Creek    60 

Nock,  Dr.  Albert  J   21 

Norris,  George  W   13 

Panama  Canal    15-16-17-106-108-109-118 

Paris   28-29-125 

Philadelphia    9-13-19-78-99-100-101-109-117 

Pittsburgh    126 

Population  (see  names  of  cities  and  boroughs) 

Port  of  New  York  Commission,  Proposed    78 

Ports,  U.  S.,  Commerce  of   99-100 

Prague   28-29 

Pratt,  Dr.  Edward  Ewing    20-124-125 

Pratt,  Sereno  S   107 

Public  Service  Commission    31 

Queens,  Borough;  Area    11-42-50-73-93 

Queens,  Borough;  Assessed  Value   '  66-93 

Queens,  Borough;  Building  Operations    12fi 

Queens,  Borough;  Growth    61-62-75-93 

Queens,  Borough;  Industry   117-121-125 

Queens,  Borough;  Population    42-50-7.4-75-93-94-95-120-124 

Queens,  Borough;  Waterfront   10-61-62 

Railroads,  Connecting    44-50-65-74 

Railroads,  D.,  L.  &  W   110 

Railroads,  Lehigh  Valley    14 

Railroads,  N.   Y.,  X.   H.   &   H  44-65 

Railroads,  Pennsylvania   44-65 

Railroads,  South  Brooklyn  :Marginal   35-36 

Richmond,  Borough;  Area    11-73-75-93 

Richmond,  Borough;  Assessed  Value   66-93 

Richmond,  Borough;  Industry   121-125 

Richmond.  Borough;  Population   75-93-94-95 

Robbins,  John  'M.,  Dry  Dock  and  Repair  Yard    108 

Rockaway   40-41-42 

Rockaway   Inlet    42-56-59-86 

Rotterdam   41-110-116 


131 


THE      PROBLEM      OF     GREATER      NEW  YORK 

Page 

Savannah    117 

Sheepshead  Bay    56 

Silleck,  Mr   108 

St.  Louis   19-126 

Smith,  R.  A.  C   8-35-96-97-99-100-101-102 

South  Brooklyn  Improvement    35 

Spring-  Creek  Basin    56 

Staniford,  Charles  W   Ill 

Staten  Island,  Terminal    37 

Stettin    117 

Sticknev,  Col.  Amos    92 

Sutter,  Col.  Charles  R   92 

Tenement  House  Department    5 

Tomkins,  Calvin  24-42-44-46-47 

Transit,  Docks  and  Ferries,  Committee  on    26 

Trieste    117 

Transportation,   Rates    43-58-59-110-122 

Tuberculosis    27, 

Tuberculosis,  Committee  on  Prevention  of    5 

Truesdale,   Mr   106 

United  States  Army,  Board  of  Engineers  ....5-42-44-45-46-71-81-86-87-90-91 

United  States,  Commerce    11 

United  States,  Department  of  Commerce    5 

United  States  Government,  Appropriations  for  Development  of  Jamaica 

Bay    46-55-81-82 

United  States  Government,  Appropriations  for  Rivers  and  Harbors ..  11-96-97 

United  States  Government.  Appropriations,  X.  Y.  Harbor  11-97 

United  States,  Development   of  Jamaica   Bay ..  42-46-54-55-56-57-59-60-61-63- 

66-67-81-86-87-88-90-91 

United  States  Merchant  IMarine    102 

Veiller,  Lawrence    28 

Walsh,  Georg-e  Ethelbert    44 

Whinery,  S   91 

"Wilgus,  William  J  58-109 

AVright,  Luke  E   81 


132 


REFERENCE  MAPS 

TO  BE  USED  IN  CONNECTION  WITH 

"THE  PROBLEM 
OF  GREATER  NEW  YORK 
AND  ITS  SOLUTION" 


THE  UNITED  STATES 

Showing  Principal  Ports,  Shipping  Routes  and 
Navigable  Rivers,  including  Panama  Canal, 
the  New  York  State  Barge  Canal  and 
the  Intra-Coastal  Waterway 


GREATER  NEW  YORK  AND 
ITS  HARBOR 

Showing  Railroad  and  Shipping  Terminals 
and  Principal  Improvements 
Described  in  the  Text 


THE  PENINSULA 
OF  BROOKLYN  AND  ITS  TWO 
WATERFRONTS 

Showing  built-up  Areas,  Wards  adjacent  to 
Jamaica  Bay  and  Crest  of  Dividing  Ridge 


